Search results

The purpose of this paper is to quantify recent changes in students' use of laptops in one academic library and to consider the potential role of new high‐tech library spaces on laptop use.

Instead of relying on standard library exit and entrance counts, this study was based on brief, structured observations of library spaces, including counts of laptop use. By conducting such observations over regular intervals in both new and pre‐existing library spaces, the authors were able to observe changes in laptop use across both time and type of library space.

The growth in laptop use dramatically exceeded expectations: 28 percent of students used laptops in existing spaces in 2005, while 62 percent of students used laptops in the same spaces in 2008. While a new, adjoining high‐tech space also had high laptop use, the opening of this new space coincided with growth in both laptop use and overall student presence in the pre‐existing library spaces. In addition, the paper posits a variety of potential causes for these changes, including available technology and hardware, university‐wide policy, and student behavior.

The changing use of laptops in libraries is important for administrative decision making at both the library and institutional level, including decisions about facilities, technology infrastructure and support, and security.

The purpose of this paper is to review the considerations necessary in developing modern library spaces.

Both internal and external segments of library space are analyzed from the positions of their physical availability to users, services offered and future prospects.

The findings indicate that the library space consists of two segments: internal and external. Internal space is physical space with traditional documents and services, and the external segment is physically intangible virtual space dealing with virtual services using electronic resources.

The two segments of library space have not previously been considered together in one paper. Also, virtual library resources and services, in respect of relating them to the certain segment of library space, have not been considered previously.

The purpose of this article is to discuss the need for librarians to be proactively involved in institutional decisions regarding repurposing or annexation of library space. As libraries transition from print to electronic delivery of journals, especially in STM intensive libraries, administration will begin to question the need to retain large runs of bound print journal volumes, especially in light of the ever‐present space crunch faced by many institutions.

The paper provides a viewpoint based on the experience of repurposing library space for alternative use.

Librarians must be proactive when addressing library space issues. It is imperative that librarians are actively involved in defining the direction and future of the library rather than waiting for the decision to be made for them by their institution.

The paper advocates the need to be proactive rather than reactive in planning for the future use of library space.

It has been suggested that “space and artifacts constitute systems of communication which organizations build up within themselves” (Gagliardi, 1992a, b, p. vi) and reflect the cultural life within that organization. This is a study of how the “landscape” of a public library (“Library X”), as an information retrieval system, relates to the values of the people who created it. The efforts here are geared towards understanding the physical instantiation of institutional culture and, more specifically, institutional values as they are reflected through the artifact.

This exploratory study, a Ph.D. dissertation completed at the University of Western Ontario in 2013, examines the materially embedded relations of power between library users and staff in public libraries and how building design regulates spatial behavior according to organizational objectives. It considers three public library buildings as organization spaces (Dale & Burrell, 2008) and determines the extent to which their spatial organizations reproduce the relations of power between the library and its public that originated with the modern public library building type ca. 1900. Adopting a multicase study design, I conducted site visits to three, purposefully selected public library buildings of similar size but various ages. Site visits included: blueprint analysis; organizational document analysis; in-depth, semi-structured interviews with library users and library staff; cognitive mapping exercises; observations; and photography.

Despite newer approaches to designing public library buildings, the use of newer information technologies, and the emergence of newer paradigms of library service delivery (e.g., the user-centered model), findings strongly suggest that the library as an organization still relies on many of the same socio-spatial models of control as it did one century ago when public library design first became standardized. The three public libraries examined show spatial organizations that were designed primarily with the librarian, library materials, and library operations in mind far more than the library user or the user’s many needs. This not only calls into question the public library’s progressiveness over the last century but also hints at its ability to survive in the new century.

Undergraduate information commons have become pervasive in the academic library landscape. In recent years, librarians and administrators have come to identify the need for comparable commons’ spaces and services for graduate students. This chapter serves as a review of recently developed models of graduate commons—in this discussion referred to as Scholars’ Commons—as defined by an integration of physical learning spaces, personnel, and a dynamic availability of research support services that support assist graduate students throughout their academic life cycle. These provisions serve as the foundation for the development of enhanced library-supported graduate student success.

Still a rare commodity, existing models from selected institutional web sites were examined using a framework for analysis consisting of several criteria: new use of space; segmented services; partnerships; and new organizational structures. Through a synthesis of the commonalities prevalent in these systems, this chapter aims to provide recommendations for prospective Scholars’ Commons models and proposals for their development. Library organizations contemplating the development of a Scholars’ Commons need to consider the needs of their target population, potential new or reallocated spaces, feasibility of providing support and research technologies, and possible staffing models. As well, the authors consider the importance of library-based graduate student support that bolsters cross-divisional collaborative partnerships across the academy.

The idea of active learning classrooms (ALCs) in post-secondary institutions across North America is not a new one and it continues to gain prominence (Davis, 2018; Ellern & Buchanan, 2018; Park & Choi, 2014). Research shows that these dynamic classrooms increased student comprehension of key concepts, problem-solving ability, improved attitude toward learning, and overall learning gains (Cotner, Loper, Walker, & Brooks, 2013; Park & Choi, 2014). Not surprisingly then, there has been a growing number of academic libraries which see the potential benefits and have incorporated ALCs, or elements of such, into their spaces (Ellern & Buchanan, 2018; Karasic, 2016; Soderdahl, 2011).

This chapter presents a case study on the 2017 redesign of a Canadian academic library, the Albert D. Cohen Management Library at the University of Manitoba in Winnipeg, Canada. Once considered a “study hall,” the renovated business library has been transformed into a modern student learning space. The library is outfitted with a modular ALC equipped to accommodate the varied learning needs of the twenty-first-century students at the Asper School of Business. The author provides a detailed first-hand account of the ALC planning process, key partnerships, challenges, and post-launch reaction.

The purpose of this paper is to propose a method for the assessment of library space use and user experience by combining seating studies, surveys and observational data.

Seating usage studies (called seating sweeps), technology-assisted face-to-face surveys and observational data were used to assess library space usage and identify user behaviors.

Results from the study revealed higher library use than expected and provided insight into user behaviors and patterns.

The methods and study described aid in raising awareness of user experience within library spaces and provide valuable data for space redesign efforts.

The study builds upon methods described by Linn (2013) and combines traditional user experience methodologies to gain insight into library space use and user needs.

The author of this chapter will explain how libraries define safe space through policies, procedures, and professional codes of ethics. The chapter will generate a history of the concept of libraries as safe space, will explain how libraries attempt to create safe spaces in physical and online environments, and will show how library practices both help and harm patrons in need of safe space.

This chapter provides a review of the literature that illustrates how libraries provide safe space – or not – for their patrons. The author will deconstruct the ALA Code of Ethics and Bill of Rights to demonstrate how libraries remain heteronormative institutions that do not recognize the existence of diverse patrons or employees, and how this phenomenon manifests in libraries.

Libraries, either through their physical construction or through policies and procedures, have become spaces for illegal activities and discrimination. Populations who would be most likely to use libraries often report barriers to access.

Libraries should revisit their policies and procedures, as well as assess their physical and online spaces, to determine whether or not they truly provide safe space for their patrons. While libraries can become safer spaces, they should clearly communicate what types of safety they actually provide.

This chapter offers a critique of libraries as safe spaces, which will challenge popular opinions of libraries, and compel the profession to improve.

Libraries can be seen as the collective identity of its employees engaged in providing a myriad of services to a community of patrons. Libraries can also exist in virtual settings, defined with descriptive parameters, described by a wider user group external to the library environment. The diverse nature of what constitutes libraries is illustrated by researchers, such as Marino and Lapintie (2015), who use the term “meta-meeting place” when describing its environs. Whatever model is used to describe contemporary libraries, the library environment usually has numerous needs and demands coming from a variety of stakeholders, from administrators to patrons. This chapter examines how we, as librarians, with users, co-construct library as both space and place.

We used a theoretical framework (social constructionism) to show how library identity is established by its users in the space planning process to address their needs and expectations and provided a case study of the main library at the University of South Florida.

We found that libraries are reflective of the vision and values of a diverse community and the social-political milieu in which they are housed. Librarians used a number of innovative methods and frames to create best/evidence-based practice approaches in space planning, re-envisioning library functions, and conducting outcomes/programmatic assessment. For librarians to create that sense of place and space for our users requires effective and open conversations and examination of our own inherent (and often unacknowledged) contradictions as to what libraries are or should be as enduring structures with evolving uses and changing users. For example, only a few of the studies focused on the spatial use and feel of libraries using new technologies or methodologies, such as social network analysis, discourse analysis, or GPS, to map the use of physical and virtual space.

First, new ways of working and engaging require reexamination of assessment and evaluation procedures and processes. To accomplish this, we must develop a more effective culture of assessment and to use innovative evaluation measures to determine use, user paths, and formal and informal groupings. Changes that affect patron and staff perceptions of library as place/third space may be difficult to assess using quantitative surveys, such as LibQual, that may not provide an opportunity for respondents to provide specifics of what “place” means to them. Second, it is important to have effective communication among all members of the library (patrons, library staff, and university administration) so that we design spaces/places that enhance the relationships among users, technology, pedagogy, and learning spaces, not just the latest “thing” in the literature.

This value of this review is to provide a social constructionist perspective (frame) on how we plan library space. This approach provides opportunities to truly engage our patrons and administration in the co-construction of what “our library” should be since it provides insight to group, place, and social dynamics.