Home

ACRL

Recent Posts

Recent Comments:

  • Marc: I really enjoyed this post! Like Sarah said, working as an academic librarian is a juggling act. One thing that...
  • Mark K.: Yes…Sharing the credit is an inherently good-person and truthful thing to do. It’s also...
  • CharS: “It’s much more challenging to start researching from scratch…” But that’s what...
  • Barbara Fister: I like the people I work with, I have plenty of variety in my work, and if I make a mistake, nobody...
  • Barbara Fister: I agree – plus it’s more fun. Another issue is that we can’t just settle for...

  • Recent Trackback

Recommended Posts



Site search

Have a story idea?

Pages

Categories

Archive

Authors

Blogroll

Manage

Login

Web Feeds

Entries RSS

Comments RSS

The Lush and Vibrant Library

Though it likely didn’t get the readership that “The Deserted Library” did, the Chronicle’s Scott Carlson followed up with a good and thoughtful overview of what makes new libraries work and how different libraries conceptualize what they’re trying to accomplish, originally published last fall but featured recently in the Chronicle’s e-mail alert. It’s still a timely piece, well worth reading.

For example, the University of Chicago, in keeping with its traditions, is interested in exposing students to as many physical volumes as possible. They don’t want the library to be a student center. According to sociology professor Andrew Abbott, “The faculty is united in thinking that this building is supposed to be the research center of one entire wing of intellectual life at the campus, and we can’t afford to let it turn into an Internet cafe.”

Hal Shill at Penn State Harrisburg conducted a survey that found fascinating results.

The responses from about 180 institutions revealed surprising patterns. For example, Mr. Shill found that the location of a library on a campus made little difference in its popularity among students. Library size did not matter, nor did the number of study rooms in a building or the availability of wireless access. “The presence of a cybercafe — that was a wash,” he says. “It was not a statistically significant feature, but I would recommend it as a creature comfort.”

More basic comforts rated highly: the quality of natural lighting, the quality of work spaces, the quality of the heating and air-conditioning system, and the overall ambiance of the building. Computer and Internet access — such as the number of data ports, the quality of the telecommunication system, and the quality of the public-access workstations — were also vital to the success of a building.

I recall the collib-l list discussions when the “Deserted Library” article came out. Many academic librarians feared their presidents would read it and conclude “great, we don’t need to spend all that money on a black hole after all.” This is an article you don’t want them to miss. Send it to your president, your provost, your physical plant director, and your advancement office. Right now.

Comments

Pingback from @ the library » Blog Archive » Coffee Doesn’t Matter After All?
Time: August 17, 2006, 7:11 pm

[...] StevenB just posted today on an article in the Chronicle that discussed what makes new library buildings “work” for students. It’s interesting to me because some of the trends we have been looking at with our architects were mentioned as NOT being the factors that make the most difference. Read the post from ACRLog called the Lush and Vibrant Library. Posted by rhondagonzales Filed in Higher Education, Library Instruction/Information Literacy, Buildings [...]

Write a comment