









































Panel Presentation 75

Small and Thriving: 
A Follow-Up to “The 
Future of the Small 
Theological Library”
Susan Ebertz, Wartburg Theological Seminary 
Elizabeth Young Miller, Moravian Theological Seminary 
Myka Kennedy Stephens, Lancaster Theological Seminary

ABSTR ACT Being small does not have to be a liability for theological 
libraries. This is the argument Myka Kennedy Stephens makes in her 
essay published in the April 2016 issue of Theological Librarianship. 
Instead, being small is something to take seriously and, in many 
cases, celebrate. As distance learning, hybrid pedagogy, and flipped 
classrooms continue to make inroads in theological education, how do 
we now envision the future of small theological libraries? This panel will 
explore and discuss habits that make theological librarians in smaller 
contexts successful. Staying attuned to needs, optimizing resources, 
and acting boldly are the habits Stephens names in her essay. This 
panel will discuss, expand, and share how these habits are applied in 
three small theological library contexts. 

INTRODUCTION

Staying attuned to needs, optimizing resources, and acting boldly—
Myka Kennedy Stephens highlights these three habits in her 2016 
article in Theological Librarianship entitled “The Future of the Small 
Theological Library” as a means to generate conversation.1 Her 
article stems from her attendance at the 2014 ATS/Atla event “The 
Future of Libraries in Theological Education: A Conversation 
with Chief Academic Officers, Information Technology Officers, 
and Library Directors.”2 Having multiple voices at the table was 
beneficial and demonstrates the importance of collaboration. Yet 
there was a lack of enthusiasm from other attendees on the future 



76  ATL A 2019 PROCEEDINGS

of small institutions.3 Certainly, being small has its disadvantages, 
in particular when survival becomes a primary concern, putting 
a damper on innovation.4 However, budget constraints can be a 
conversation starter and a way to explore opportunities. There is, 
indeed, value in being small, especially when it challenges us to 
become trendsetters, thinking outside of the box.5 

So what does “small” look like? According to Stephens, who draws 
upon several sources to create a broad definition, “small” means one 
or more of the following apply:

• There are five or fewer full-time library staff
• The annual budget is less than $500,000
• Institutional enrollment is under 200 FTE
• The institution self-identifies as small.6

Three years after the publication of this article, we would like to 
further reflect on how these three habits impact the outcomes at our 
small theological libraries. It is a continuation of conversation and 
dialogue among librarians at small theological libraries about what 
helps us to thrive. Elizabeth Young Miller, seminary liaison librarian 
at Moravian Theological Seminary and Moravian College, shares how 
staying attuned to needs led to innovations in reference services and 
information literacy instruction. Susan Ebertz, library director at 
Wartburg Theological Seminary, shares how optimizing resources 
informs her strategic planning process. Myka Kennedy Stephens, 
seminary librarian at Lancaster Theological Seminary, shares how 
acting boldly has continued to place her library on the leading edge 
of open source library systems.

STAYING ATTUNED TO NEEDS AT MORAVIAN

Located in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, Moravian Theological Semi-
nary is an embedded institution, sharing resources with Moravian 
College, a private liberal arts institution. I serve as the seminary 
liaison librarian, with approximately a third of my time dedicated 
to the seminary community and two-thirds focused on services to 
undergraduates. The seminary’s FTE for spring 2019 was forty-five.

Listening and visibility are crucial and taking a proactive 
approach always helps. Therefore, in the fall of 2015, during my 



Panel Presentation 77

first semester at Moravian, I paid what I have dubbed “house calls” 
at the seminary—meeting individually with any interested faculty 
members to get a pulse on library services and needs. These meet-
ings provided meaningful context for collection development 
purposes and a launching pad for new services and projects. For 
example, I now offer office hours one hour a week in the seminary’s 
hub—the kitchen. Students, faculty, and staff stop by to say hello, ask 
a question, and/or enjoy a homemade cookie. 

During the house calls with faculty, I learned of the seminary’s 
wish to expand its distance education offerings, spurring me to 
examine resources and services for this population. I now offer 
library instruction via Zoom, as well as reference appointments. 
Meeting with students via Zoom to discuss their research ques-
tions and projects provides flexibility to working students and me, 
a mom. I also began creating a series of online tutorials focused on 
the following:

• Accessing our resources remotely
• Using online tools for research in theology
• Special database search features, such as the Bible citation 

search in Atla, and how to create a folder, as well as an alert 
using an EBSCO database

• Searching the online library catalog
• Requesting items through interlibrary loan
• Utilizing the Atla Reciprocal Borrowing Program, etc.7

I relied on conversations with faculty and students to develop the 
content of these online tutorials.

More and more students live outside of Bethlehem, so I do my best 
to promote and expand reciprocal borrowing agreements. Moravian 
has direct reciprocal borrowing partnerships with other local colleges 
and universities, regional seminaries, and member libraries who 
participate in the Atla Reciprocal Borrowing Program.

In her article, Stephens emphasizes the importance of a needs 
assessment that not only includes current students, faculty, and staff, 
but accounts for alums and local clergy too.8 Being mindful of both 
current students and alums, who may have limited funds and varying 
access to physical library resources, I have done my best to promote 



78  ATL A 2019 PROCEEDINGS

free and open source tools. I significantly expanded a research guide 
designed specifically for clergy and alums.9 The emphasis of this guide 
is primarily on free resources and includes links to congregational 
and professional resources, e-books, statistical sources, survey tools, 
and copyright information. In generating this content, I again relied 
on conversations with stakeholders and looked at what other librar-
ies have done. A similar research guide created by Suzanne Estelle-
Holmer at Yale Divinity Library proved very valuable.10 Knowing that 
library patrons search our online library catalog, I also collaborated 
with a colleague to integrate Princeton Theological Commons into our 
integrated library system (ILS). This collection expands our resources 
to include primary sources, which can sometimes be difficult to find.

Both STEP Bible and Zotero are free resources that current 
students and alums alike may find valuable. Like Accordance, Bible-
Works, and Logos, STEP Bible is a free tool that provides access to 
different translations of the Bible, as well as commentaries.11 In the 
past, students in intro level courses relied on BibleWorks. When I 
learned that updates to BibleWorks would no longer be supported, 
I alerted faculty to STEP Bible. Faculty and students were grateful 
to learn about this resource. Another free tool that students love is 
Zotero, a bibliographic management tool that works with Word and 
now Google Docs to generate citations.12 Many students struggle with 
citation, so Zotero is a way to simplify their research. For financial 
reasons, the institution does not offer an institutional subscription to 
RefWorks or EndNote, fee-based competitors of Zotero. The beauty of 
Zotero, though, is that students, especially those working on a thesis, 
have access to their citations after graduation.

In the fall of 2018, I offered Zotero workshops in the library at 
lunchtime. However, these sessions were sparsely attended. Again, 
recognizing that everyone has a different schedule, I was delighted 
to read about Rebecca Kuglitsch and Peggy Burge’s approach—
on-demand workshops.13 If two or more students are interested in 
attending a Zotero workshop, they contact a librarian to request a time 
that is convenient for them.14 I shared this idea with several seminary 
faculty members and they are supportive of this tactic. I am looking 
forward to trying this new approach in the fall of 2019. 

In her article, Stephens envisions “a future in which [small 
theological libraries] are true educational partners with our 



Panel Presentation 79

institutions,” and this is certainly one of my goals.15 I am always looking 
for ways to contribute to and enhance the seminary’s curriculum and 
having a seat at the table during seminary faculty meetings gives me 
great insight. Participating in discussions surrounding curriculum 
revisions has allowed me to learn what gatekeeping measures are 
important to faculty and then map some of them to The Framework 
for Information Literacy for Higher Education.16 In May 2019, during a 
two-day seminary meeting, I joined in the conversation regarding 
revisions to the course Learning in Community, also known as LinC. 
All seminary students, regardless of degree program, are required to 
take this course. After listening and then sharing some observations 
and concerns, the entire faculty was onboard with expanding the 
information literacy component of this course and requiring students 
to take this course during their first semester of study. Beginning 
fall 2019, I will be meeting with the class as a whole to provide an 
orientation to the library and to discuss plagiarism; this is what I have 
done in the past. I will then be meeting in small groups with students 
in each degree program to highlight relevant resources and services. 
I am hopeful that this new approach will be beneficial for students.

Sometimes the focus of library services revolves around 
students; however, it is important not to overlook faculty. In addi-
tion to attending faculty meetings, informal conversations have 
helped me stay attuned to their needs too. The faculty are routinely 
examining current degree programs and the potential for new ones. 
This spring, two faculty members approached me and asked for my 
assistance with research on a degree program. I was able to help, and 
we presented our findings at a faculty meeting. Since I have been at 
Moravian, I have noticed an increase in reference questions from 
faculty members, as well as requests for research consultations. 
In addition to word of mouth, these interactions may stem from an 
information literacy workshop I offered for faculty members in May 
2016. After reading some articles and hearing the comment from 
faculty members, “I always learn something new when I come to 
the library,” I approached the dean about offering an information 
literacy session for faculty. To ensure that the session would be 
meaningful for faculty, I created a survey to gauge their knowledge 
of and interest in various resources and topics. The ensuing session 
went very well.



80  ATL A 2019 PROCEEDINGS

I thoroughly enjoy working at a small institution, where I can 
wear different hats and try new things. Having an idea and being 
able to implement it is rewarding, as is the ability to change course 
if needed. At Moravian, I have been able to stay attuned to the needs 
of the seminary library community by doing the following: main-
taining visibility, keeping open channels of communication, listen-
ing, seeking collaborative opportunities that further the goals of the 
institution, aiming for inclusivity, and being receptive to new ideas 
and approaches. While I do not have a crystal ball to foretell the 
future, I believe that these habits can help small libraries remain 
relevant.

OPTIMIZING LIBRARY RESOURCES AT WARTBURG

Context is important in understanding my perspective in talking 
about optimizing library resources. About two-thirds of Wartburg 
Theological Seminary students are online. My focus right now is 
on providing comparable resources for our online students. At 
the same time, I need to make sure that our residential students 
receive the resources they need. In looking at optimizing library 
resources, there are four types of resources to consider: personnel 
resources, financial resources, physical resources, and informa-
tional resources. 

Personnel resources may include paid permanent staff, student 
workers, and volunteers. In order to optimize staffing resources, it 
is important to match the skills to the needed tasks. Someone will 
do a better job if they are good at the task or interested in doing the 
task. We have staff fill out a form which includes experiences, skills, 
what they like to do, what they do not like to do, and what they want 
to learn. We then use the form to assign tasks to the students. We use 
Asana to keep track of tasks and projects.17 Projects are assigned to 
all of the students. The project manager initially assigns the tasks 
to the other students. If a student is not able to complete the task, 
they are able to reassign the task. Depending on the urgency of the 
task, the student may keep the task and work on it the next time she 
or he is working. We use a Microsoft Outlook calendar to schedule 
workers. All staff have access to the calendar and can switch times 
with others. The calendar is useful in assigning tasks.



Panel Presentation 81

Financial resources include the library’s budget and donations. 
Physical resources include the physical library space and how it is 
used. The library’s website can also be considered as space even 
though it is not physical. It is a virtual space which the distance 
students inhabit. Informational resources include physical books, 
periodicals, audio material, and video, as well as the online counter-
parts to these.

Optimizing resources means knowing your limitations. All four 
types of resources have their limits, especially for small libraries. 
Limitations to personnel resources include time. Staff have a limited 
amount of time. Tasks take a specific amount of time to complete. 
Sometimes tasks can take more time than is available. Staff also have 
limitations in expertise. It is important to know one’s own strengths 
and weaknesses and those of the staff. Financial resources, or lack 
thereof, can also be a significant limitation. 

I am learning to see my limitations. I want to do it all. If I start some-
thing new, I want to continue to do all the things I have been doing. This 
isn’t always possible because of the limits of my library’s resources. In 
The Practice of Adaptive Leadership, Ronald Heifetz, Alexander Grashow, 
and Martin Linsky talk about how adaptive leadership means that 
there will be losses.18 

I am currently working on a strategic plan for our library so that I can 
more clearly state the library’s vision for the next several years and its 
focus. This will help me know where to go and what to let go. We can then 
focus our resources on what is more important rather than what we 
have been doing or what we enjoy doing. What is our mission? How does 
it support the mission of the school? I have been thinking about elegant 
simplicity and the need to focus on assessment and evaluation so that I 
know that our actions and goals align with our mission and vision. Our 
focus should also be on our strengths. An analysis of resources in terms 
of our strengths is crucial to optimizing them.

As we work on our strategic plan, I need to constantly remind 
myself that if I add something, I will need to subtract something. I am 
learning to say, “no.” This is different from saying, “I can’t.” Rather, it is 
an acknowledgement of the truth of limitations: “If I do that, I will not 
be able to do something else. Right now, my priorities are elsewhere.” 
The strategic plan will help me to articulate those priorities.



82  ATL A 2019 PROCEEDINGS

ACTING BOLDLY AT LANCASTER

Not much has changed about Lancaster Theological Seminary over 
the past three years since the article in Theological Librarianship was 
published. It is still a small school and reported an FTE of 86 in the 
2018–19 academic year. The library has approximately 430 current 
patrons, including students, faculty, staff, alumni, visiting students 
and faculty, and community members. We are averaging around 100 
individuals logging into their library accounts each month. Total 
physical circulation (checkouts, renewals, and local use) spans from 
around 300 items per month when classes are not in session to over 
800 items in our busiest months. We are nearing the end of a major 
weeding project and have removed approximately 60,000 items 
from our collection so far, bringing our current total number of items 
down to approximately 109,000. Our staff includes another full-time 
librarian, two part-time assistants, and up to two student workers.

The most notable way I have been able to lead my small library 
in acting boldly has been through our continued improvements to 
discovery and access of our collections and subscriptions, both print 
and electronic. Lancaster Seminary’s library has become an early 
adopter of a few library technologies and we’re now on the leading 
edge of developments to Koha, an open source integrated library 
system. Our small size was a major factor in how we were able to 
do this—an asset that I was able to leverage to bring much-needed 
improvements to our patrons.

Shortly after we migrated to Koha, EBSCO developed a plugin that 
would bring EBSCO Discovery Service (EDS) searches into the Koha 
interface using API. After trying another discovery service and since 
most of our database and electronic journal subscriptions are consoli-
dated with EBSCO, I began asking about special pricing for our library. 
Partly because we wanted to adopt the newly developed plugin for 
Koha and also because we were of a smaller size, the pricing I received 
was within our reach and we were able to move forward as one of the 
first Koha libraries to implement the EDS API plugin. 

After implementing that change, it became clear that we also 
needed to improve authentication pathways to our resources, particu-
larly for patrons accessing electronic resources from off campus. I was 
able to innovate a way to provide direct URLs in patron accounts that 



Panel Presentation 83

would be accessible when a patron logged in, but this was cumber-
some and problematic when a patron was attempting off-campus 
searches of EDS through our Koha interface. After a year of research-
ing alternatives, I was approached by EBSCO to consider OpenAthens, 
an authentication platform developed by the UK company Eduserv. 
Our implementation of OpenAthens coincided with EBSCO’s devel-
opment of an OpenAthens plugin for Koha. Though the process was 
long and had many different phases, we were EBSCO’s first OpenA-
thens customer in Pennsylvania and one of the earliest adopters of the 
OpenAthens plugin among Koha libraries. Our patrons can now search 
EDS and access our databases seamlessly once they have successfully 
logged in to their library account, with licensed access permissions 
tailored to their patron category and regardless of whether they are 
on campus or remote.

Facility with implementing these new technologies in the library 
gave me the confidence to agree to join an early adopter program for 
upgrades to Koha through our support company, ByWater Solutions. 
My staff and our users had shown a level of flexibility, understanding, 
and patience that is needed for early adoption. Being an early adopter 
for Koha upgrades has meant that our library is one of the first librar-
ies partnered with ByWater to be migrated to the next stable release 
of Koha. This often means that there are a few bugs in the system that 
have not yet been identified. Early adopters are often tasked with find-
ing and reporting these bugs so that the community can develop, test, 
and release patches. For open source software, this is an important 
community-driven process and it offers me a sense of fulfillment and 
purpose that our small library is helping to make a difference beyond 
our own context.

Our reputation as early adopters has led to an even deeper partner-
ship that is presently having a direct impact on future developments 
of Koha. Earlier this year, our library was selected by the developers 
at ByWater to test and implement Elasticsearch, a new search engine 
technology that is being integrated into Koha.19 Elasticsearch is faster 
and more robust than Zebra, the default search engine for Koha. With 
it we can customize our mappings and set our own relevancy rankings, 
giving us more control over search results and reducing the number of 
irrelevant titles that appear higher in the results list. It will also even-
tually support browse functionality for bibliographic and authority 



84  ATL A 2019 PROCEEDINGS

records. Elasticsearch developments had reached a stall in the Koha 
community because not enough libraries were using it. When asked 
why our library was a good candidate for this opportunity, the develop-
ers answered that it was in part because of our size. We have enough 
diversity in our records to test a variety of search functions, yet not too 
many records that would take a long time to re-index when updates 
are made. We have enough staff and users to use and test the system, 
but not too many that would make collecting reports of bugs difficult 
or cumbersome. It was an equally attractive prospect for us because 
we receive the added benefit of being able to test and enjoy leading-
edge technology and one-on-one support without added costs that 
usually come with enhancements and customizations.

As I reflect on the ways we’ve been able to capitalize on our small 
size to bring innovations to our library systems, I see that acting 
boldly is often dependent upon the librarian’s strengths, interests, 
and personality. Yes, our library was the right size and in the right 
place at the right time to be able to find and act upon the opportuni-
ties to integrate EDS, OpenAthens, and Elasticsearch into our Koha 
installation. However, it was also the combination of my strengths 
in library systems and my interest in open source development that 
made our early adoption of these technologies successful. I used to 
think it was simply a matter of weighing risk over reward and analyz-
ing the cost-benefit of various actions. What I am now realizing is 
that my own attitudes influence these equations. I believe there are 
many and various ways in which small libraries can take bold action 
and become trend-setters rather than trend-followers, but these will 
emerge influenced by our own personalities and attitudes as librar-
ians and leaders of small libraries.

To expand on cultivating the habit of acting boldly, I propose that 
there are several attitudes that lend themselves to bold action. Curi-
osity is key. One must be ready to ask questions and explore in order 
to find opportunities to act boldly. Accompanying that is confidence 
and courage. Acting boldly requires a level of confidence to venture 
in a new direction and courage to face any obstacles or failures in the 
process. Persistence is also extremely important. Bold action rarely 
results in an immediate, resounding success. It often takes additional 
work, troubleshooting, and problem-solving. When too many obsta-
cles arise, humility is necessary to learn from the experience, remain 



Panel Presentation 85

open to constructive criticism, and discern a new path forward.
There are also attitudes that present challenges to cultivating the 

habit of acting boldly. Perfectionism can be particularly crippling, as 
can rigidity, failure to recognize limits, and losing the connection to 
needs and available resources. Self-awareness is critically important 
to be able to recognize what attitudes and inclinations one might 
have that would interfere with or inhibit bold action. For me, this is a 
continual process of discernment and reflection.

ENDNOTES

1  Myka Kennedy Stephens, “The Future of the Small Theological 
Library,” Theological Librarianship 9, no. 1 (April 2016): 28 and 31, 
https://doi.org/10.31046/tl.v9i1.411.

2  Stephens, “The Future of the Small Theological Library,” 28.
3  Stephens, “The Future of the Small Theological Library,” 28.
4  Stephens, “The Future of the Small Theological Library,” 30.
5  Stephens, “The Future of the Small Theological Library,” 30.
6  Stephens, “The Future of the Small Theological Library,” 29.
7  “Seminary Library Tutorials: General Research Tutorials,” 

Reeves Library, Moravian College, accessed September 23, 
2019, https://moravian.libguides.com/seminarytutorials.

8  Stephens, “The Future of the Small Theological Library,” 31.
9  “Recommended Resources for Clergy and Alums: Congrega-

tional and Professional Resources,” Reeves Library, Moravian 
College, accessed September 23, 2019, https://moravian.lib-
guides.com/clergyandalums.

10  “Free Web Resources on Religion,” Yale University Library, ac-
cessed September 23, 2019, https://guides.library.yale.edu/free-
web.

11  “STEP Bible,” Tyndale House, accessed September 23, 2019, 
https://stepbible.org.

12  “Zotero: Your Personal Research Assistant,” Corporation for 
Digital Scholarship, accessed September 23, 2019, https://
zotero.org.

13  Rebecca Z. Kuglitsch and Peggy Burge, “Beyond the First Year: 
Supporting Sophomores Through Information Literacy Out-
reach,” College and Undergraduate Libraries 23, no. 1 (2016): 89.

https://doi.org/10.31046/tl.v9i1.411
https://moravian.libguides.com/seminarytutorials
https://moravian.libguides.com/clergyandalums
https://moravian.libguides.com/clergyandalums
https://guides.library.yale.edu/freeweb
https://guides.library.yale.edu/freeweb
https://stepbible.org
https://zotero.org
https://zotero.org


86  ATL A 2019 PROCEEDINGS

14  Kuglitsch and Burge, “Beyond the First Year,” 89.
15  Stephens, “The Future of the Small Theological Library,” 29.
16  “Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education,” 

Association of College & Research Libraries, accessed Septem-
ber 23, 2019, http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/ilframework.

17  “Asana,” Asana, accessed September 23, 2019, https://asana.com.
18  Ronald Heifetz, Alexander Grashow, and Marty Linsky, The 

Practice of Adaptive Leadership: Tools and Tactics for Changing Your 
Organization and the World (Boston: Harvard Business School 
Publishing, 2009), 96.

19  Nick Clemens, “Kohacon 2019: Elasticsearch Update,” ByWater 
Solutions, accessed September 23, 2019, https://bywatersolu-
tions.com/news/kohacon-2019-elasticsearch-update.

http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/ilframework
https://asana.com
https://bywatersolutions.com/news/kohacon-2019-elasticsearch-update
https://bywatersolutions.com/news/kohacon-2019-elasticsearch-update

