C&RL News June 2010  286

ACRL Research Planning and Review Committee

2010 top ten trends in academic libraries
A review of the current literature

Members of the ACRL Research Planning and Review 
Committee: Lynn Silipigni Connaway is a senior research 
scientist at OCLC Research, e-mail: lynn_connaway@
oclc.org; Karen Downing is foundation/grants and 
executive research service librarian at University of 
Michigan, e-mail: kdown@umich.edu; Yunfei Du is 
assistant professor, College of Information, University 
of North Texas, e-mail: ydu@unt.edu; Donna Goda is 
reference-bibliographer for international studies and 
foreign languages at the U.S. Naval Academy, e-mail: 
goda@usna.edu; Mildred L. Jackson is associate 
dean for collections at University of Alabama, e-mail: 
mljackson@ua.edu; Ryan Johnson, chair, is head of 
information, outreach and delivery services at University 
of Mississippi, e-mail: rjohnson@olemiss.edu; Janice S. 
Lewis is associate director at East Carolina University, 
e-mail: lewisja@ecu.edu; Lutishoor Salisbury is head of 
the Chemistry and Biochemistry Library at University of 
Arkansas, e-mail: lsalisbu@uark.edu 

The ACRL Research, Planning and Review Committee, a component of the Research 
Coordinating Committee, is responsible for 
creating and updating a continuous and 
dynamic environmental scan for the associa-
tion that encompasses trends in academic 
librarianship, higher education, and the 
broader environment. As a part of this effort, 
the committee develops a list of the top ten 
trends that are affecting academic libraries 
now and in the near future. This list was 
compiled based on an extensive review of 
current literature (see selected bibliography 
at the end of this article). The committee also 
developed an e-mail survey that was sent 
to 9,812 ACRL members in February 2010. 
Although the response rate was small (about 
five percent), it helped to clarify the trends. 

The trends are listed in alphabetical order. 
• Academic library collection growth is 

driven by patron demand and will include 
new resource types. Budget reductions, user 
preferences for electronic access to materials, 
limited physical space, and the inability to 
financially sustain comprehensive collections 
have led many academic libraries to shift from 
a “just-in-case” to a “just-in-time” philosophy. 
This change has been facilitated by custom-
ized patron-driven acquisitions programs 
from some major library book distributors, 
improved print-on-demand options for 
monographs, patron desire for new resource 
types, and resource sharing systems, such as 
RapidILL, offering 24-hour turnaround time 
for article requests. Still to be determined 
are the long-term effects of this change on 
the ability of academic libraries to meet their 
clientele’s information needs, the stability of 

some of the new access methods, and impli-
cations for future scholarship. Increasingly, 
libraries are acquiring local collections and 
unique materials and, when possible, digi-
tizing them to provide immediate, full-text 
online access to increase visibility and use. 
Access to full-text sources, not the discovery 
of the sources, is a major issue for scholars.1 

These materials may include special col-
lections, university archives, and/or the schol-
arly output of faculty and students. Libraries 
also recognize the need to collect, preserve, 
and provide access to digital datasets. 

According to a 2009 OCLC report, datasets 
are beginning to be made available online for 
“collecting,” but libraries still need to learn 
how to support discovery.2 The 2010 Horizon 
Report identified visual data analysis tools as 
one of the emerging technologies most likely 
to enter mainstream use on campuses within 
the next four-to-five years.3 Additional col-
lection development trends noted by survey 

june10b.indd   286 5/27/2010   9:12:17 AM



June 2010  287 C&RL News

respondents include the effect of Google 
Books on library collections, the monopoliza-
tion of content resulting from consolidation 
in the publishing industry and the demise 
of a number of smaller publishers and pub-
lications, and a growth in shared collection 
development.

• Budget challenges will continue and 
libraries will evolve as a result. This is a trend 
no one wants to see continue, but one that 
is real for many postsecondary institutions. 
Many libraries faced stagnant or reduced op-
erating and materials budgets for the 2009–10 
fiscal year, and the near future will likely bring 
additional budget pressures. 

According to the Chronicle of Higher 
Education, the average return for college 
and university endowments in the 2009 fis-
cal year was -18.7 percent, the worst since 
1974. In addition, federal stimulus dollars for 
education are running out, with only 14.2 
percent of the stimulus money set aside for 
states’ education budget remaining for the 
2011 fiscal year and 20 states with nothing 
left to spend; the proportion of state budgets 
spent on public colleges and the proportion 
of college budgets that come from the state 
were already declining, with the recession 
exacerbating a trend whereby state spend-
ing on higher education failed to keep up 
with enrollment growth and inflation; even 
when the economy improves, state revenues 
typically lag in their recovery by at least two 
years.4 Survey respondents are concerned 
about the effect of budget pressures on 
their ability to attract and retain staff, build 
collections, provide access to resources and 
services, and develop and implement innova-
tive services.

• Changes in higher education will require 
that librarians possess diverse skill sets. As 
technological changes continue to impact 
not only the way libraries are used but also 
the nature of collections, librarians need to 
broaden their portfolio of skills to provide 
services to users. Academic librarians will 
need ongoing formal training to continue 
in the profession. We may see an increasing 
number of non-MLS professionals in aca-

demic libraries with the skills needed to work  
in this changing environment. Graduate LIS 
programs and professional organizations will 
be challenged to provide new and relevant 
professional development while individual 
librarians and their institutions will struggle to 
fund such development. The profession may 
need to consider whether the terminal degree 
required for librarians should be changed or 
broadened. 

A recent OCLC report calls for academic li-
braries to “reassess all library job descriptions 
and qualifications to ensure that training and 
hiring encompass the skills, education, and 
experience needed to support new modes of 
research.”5 The impending retirement of many 
library directors will also create changes. Are 
associate deans/directors ready for new roles? 
What about the middle managers who might 
step into higher-level administrative roles? 
Leadership training and mentoring, both 
formal and informal, are critical to a smooth 
transition. Survey respondents fear that posi-
tions will be eliminated as individuals retire 
and that widespread retirements will result 
in a leadership gap and loss of institutional 
memory. They also worry that older librar-
ians are delaying retirement for economic 
reasons, thereby reducing opportunities for 
newer librarians. 

• Demands for accountability and assess-
ment will increase. Increasingly, academic 
libraries are required to demonstrate the value 
they provide to their clientele and institutions. 
This trend is part of a broader accountability 
movement within higher education, result-
ing from demands from federal and state 
governments, accrediting bodies, employers, 
parents, and taxpayers for institutions to show 
the value of a college education and results 
of student learning outcomes. 

In the current economic climate, compe-
tition for limited funds has intensified with 
some institutions revisiting funding formulas 
for libraries. It is increasingly important to 
demonstrate the library’s impact on student 
learning outcomes, student engagement, 
student recruitment and retention, success-
ful grant applications, and faculty research 

june10b.indd   287 5/27/2010   9:12:17 AM



C&RL News June 2010  288

productivity. Several studies are underway 
that will help academic libraries document 
the value of their services and collections, 
using both qualitative and quantitative data. 
Of particular interest are ACRL’s value of aca-
demic libraries research project and “Value, 
Outcomes, and Return on Investment of 
Academic Libraries (Lib-Value),” a three-year 
grant-funded study led by researchers at the 
University of Tennessee, the University of 
Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, and the As-
sociation of Research Libraries.6 

• Digitization of unique library collections 
will increase and require a larger share of 
resources. Digitization projects make hidden 
and underused special collections available to 
researchers worldwide. As Clifford Lynch (Co-
alition for Networked Information) has said, 
“special collections are a nexus where tech-
nology and content are meeting to advance 
scholarship in extraordinary new ways.”7 

Many digital projects have been funded 
in part by grants from sources such as the 
Institute of Museum and Library Services 
(IMLS) and the Mellon Foundation, while 
others are supported in total by institutional 
funds. Collaborative digitization opportunities 
abound: member libraries of the Association 
of Southeastern Research Libraries are creat-
ing a digital shared collection of 5,000 items 
from their rare and special collections that will 
help explain the intellectual underpinnings 
of the American Civil War. The University of 
California Digital Library used IMLS funds for 
the California Local History Digital Resources 
Project, to which more than 65 institutions 
contributed. Because of the staffing, equip-
ment, and storage costs associated with digital 
projects, libraries often must reallocate fiscal 
resources to support these projects. Like 
other library collections and services, digiti-
zation efforts may be affected by stagnant or 
reduced budgets. 

• Explosive growth of mobile devices and 
applications will drive new services. Smart 
phones, e-book readers, iPads, and other 
handheld devices will drive user demands 
and expectations. The 2009 ECAR study of 
undergraduate students and information 

technology found that 51.2 percent of respon-
dents owned an Internet-capable handheld 
device and another 11.8 percent planned to 
purchase one within the next 12 months.8 Stu-
dents indicated that they most wanted to use 
their institution’s e-mail service, administra-
tive services, and course management system 
from their handheld devices. While only 14.8 
percent of respondents indicated that they 
wanted to use library services, this percent-
age is likely to grow quickly, as vendors of-
fer mobile interfaces to electronic resources, 
mobile applications for OPACs increase, and 
more libraries offer reference services via text 
messaging and mobile interfaces to their own 
digital collections. 

Librarians will need to think creatively 
about developing services for users of mo-
bile devices and take into account both user 
needs and preferences and the relationship 
of services to the academic program of their 
institution.9 Regardless of the services a library 
chooses to offer, there will be staffing, train-
ing, budgeting, marketing, and instruction 
implications. 

• Increased collaboration will expand the 
role of the library within the institution and 
beyond. Collaboration efforts will continue 
to diversify: collaborating with faculty to in-
tegrate library resources into the curriculum 
and to seek out information literacy instruc-
tion, and as an embedded librarian; working 
with scholars to provide access to their data 
sets, project notes, papers, etc. in virtual re-
search environments and digital repositories; 
collaborating with information technology 
experts to develop online tutorials and user-
friendly interfaces to local digital collections; 
collaborating with student support services to 
provide integrated services to students; and 
collaborating with librarians at other institu-
tions to improve open source software, share 
resources, purchase materials, and preserve 
collections. 

The HathiTrust shared digital reposi-
tory and 2CUL are two examples of recent, 
large-scale collaborations.10 Partnership in 
HathiTrust is open to research institutions 
worldwide who share its vision of collecting, 

june10b.indd   288 5/27/2010   9:12:17 AM



June 2010  289 C&RL News

organizing, preserving, communicating, and 
sharing the record of human knowledge. The 
Cornell and Columbia University Libraries 
have formed an innovative partnership called 
2CUL that will result in a pooling of resources 
and broad integration on a number of fronts, 
such as cataloging, e-resource management, 
collaborative collection development, and 
digital preservation. Collaboration epitomiz-
es the service orientation of librarianship and 
will continue to help maximize the efficient 
use of resources. Librarians are making use 
of Google Docs, Doodle, wikis, and other 
tools that facilitate collaboration regardless 
of physical proximity. 

• Libraries will continue to lead efforts to 
develop scholarly communication and intel-
lectual property services. Academic libraries 
have recognized the importance of scholarly 
communication and intellectual property is-
sues for many years. Recent developments 
illustrate a trend toward proactive efforts to 
educate faculty and students about authors’ 
rights and open access publishing options 
and to recruit content for institutional re-
positories (IRs). Digital repository project 
managers report that scholars “lacked an 
understanding of copyright and the issues 
of copyright compliance”11 and that many 
of them “did not understand or could not 
remember or retrieve the agreements that 
were signed with publishers for the publi-
cation and dissemination of their work”.12 
Interest in these issues is illustrated by the 
growth in SPARC membership: more than 
200 North American research and academic 
libraries belong to SPARC; about the same 
number participated in the Open Access 
Week in 2009.13 

Recruiting content for IRs provides a 
natural entrée for conversations about 
scholarly communication issues. This also 
illustrates the need for libraries to provide 
guidance and user education on copyright 
law, and, in particular, the need to obtain 
permission to use copyrighted material in 
one’s work if the use is not covered by the 
fair use exception. Libraries are addressing 
the need to provide value-added scholarly 

communication services in a variety of ways. 
Some libraries have created scholarly com-
munication librarian or copyright officer po-
sitions. Others have taken a more distributed 
approach. The University of Minnesota, for 
example, has included scholarly communica-
tion responsibilities in the position descrip-
tions of all of its liaison librarians. 

Other trends, including growing use of 
open source products, creation of more 
locally created digital collections, the in-
creasing complexity of licensing issues, and 
litigation involving the use of materials in 
course e-reserves and course management 
systems, reinforce the need for academic 
libraries to provide value-added intellectual 
property services. 

• Technology will continue to change 
services and required skills. Cloud comput-
ing, augmented and virtual reality, discovery 
tools, open content, open source software, 
and new social networking tools are some 
of the most important technological changes 
affecting academic libraries. As with mobile 
applications, these developments will affect 
nearly all library operations. Two exciting 
developments are OCLC’s new cooperative 
Web-scale library management services 
and discovery tools, which provide a single 
interface to multiple resources using a cen-
tralized consolidated index that promises 
faster and better search results than feder-
ated searching. 

While social networking tools can help 
libraries go where their users are, many li-
brarians see challenges in determining which 
tools to use, how many resources to devote, 
and how to assess effectiveness. Librarians 
also will be monitoring the success of open 
source integrated library systems software 
and the RDA: Resource Description and 
Access standard.

• The definition of the library will change 
as physical space is repurposed and virtual 
space expands. Most academic libraries pro-
vide access to a more resources than ever 
before. However, the number of physical 
items in many libraries is declining, as 
libraries withdraw journal runs to which 

june10b.indd   289 5/27/2010   9:12:17 AM



C&RL News June 2010  290

they have permanent online archival access 
and/or move lesser-used materials to off-site 
or shared storage facilities, thus freeing up 
areas that are repurposed to provide space 
for individual student and collaborative work. 
Libraries are expanding their virtual space, 
reducing space within the library facility for 
collections, and re-purposing it for student 
use. The concept of “Library as Place” is still 
important to students, researchers, and many 
faculty members. Some libraries have added 
writing, tutoring, and media centers to pro-
vide multiple academic support services in 
one convenient location. 

Finding a balance that serves all clien-
tele continues to be a challenge. These 
changes are coming at the same time that 
in-person reference desk statistics are de-
clining at many academic libraries, while 
online reference statistics are increasing. 
In some instances, this is tied to a growth 
in distance or online courses offered by 
the institution; in others, it may simply be 
due to user preference and convenience: 
“It is clear that regardless of age or experi-
ence, academic discipline, or context of the 
information need, speed and convenience 
are important to users and are factors when 
selecting discovery tools and resources.”14 

Librarians are also expanding the library’s 
virtual presence through involvement in 
course management systems and online 
social networking sites, the creation of on-
line tutorials and other instruction aids, and 
more vibrant and interactive Web sites. How 
to convey the value of the complementary 
nature of the physical and online services to 
support the teaching and instruction mission 
of the university to campus administrators 
presents an ongoing challenge. 

There were a number of other trends 
that the committee considered but that did 
not yet rise to this level. Sustainability, in 
particular, was an issue that the committee 
sees as a growing trend that will probably be 
included is this list in coming years. 

The committee welcomes your com-
ments and feedback on the trends. A 
virtual session will be held on July 7 as a 

part of the ALA Annual Virtual Conference 
to allow for a more in-depth discussion of 
this report.

Bibliography
1. Lynn Silipigni Connaway and Timothy 

J. Dickey, The Digital Information Seeker: 
Report of Findings from Selected OCLC, RIN, 
and JISC User Behavior Projects, 2010, www.
jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/publications 
/reports/2010/digitalinformationseekerreport.
pdf.

2. Carole L. Palmer, Lauren C. Teffeau, 
and Carrie M. Pirmann, Scholarly Information 
Practices in the Online Environment: Themes 
from the Literature and Implications for Li-
brary Service Development. Report Commis-
sioned by OCLC Research (Dublin, OH: OCLC, 
2009), www.oclc.org/programs/publications 
/reports/2009-02.pdf.

3. L. Johnson, A. Levine, R. Smith, and 
S. Stone, The 2010 Horizon Report (Austin, 
Texas: The New Media Consortium, 2010), 
wp.nmc.org/horizon2010/.

4. “Performance of College-Endowment 
Investments,” Chronicle of Higher Educa-
tion, January 28, 2010, chronicle.com/article
/Chart-Performance-of/63754/; Sara Hebel, 
“State Cuts Are Pushing Public Colleges into 
Peril,” Chronicle of Higher Education, March 
14, 2010), chronicle.com/article/In-Many 
-States-Public-High/64620/.

5. Chris Bourg, Ross Coleman, and Ricky 
Erway, Support for the Research Process: 
An Academic Library Manifesto (Dublin, 
OH: OCLC, 2009), www.oclc.org/research 
/publications/library/2009/2009-07.pdf.

6. ACRL, “ACRL Selects Value of Aca-
demic Libraries Researcher” (Chicago, IL: 
ACRL, 2010), http://0-www.ala.org.sapl.sat.
lib.tx.us/ala/newspresscenter/news/pressre-
leases2010/january2010/researcher_acrl.cfm; 
David Green, “ARL Partners in Grant to Study 
Value of Academic Libraries” (Washington, 
DC: ARL, 2009), www.arl.org/news/pr/ROI 
-grant-12jan10.shtml.

7. Clifford A. Lynch, “Special Collections 
at the Cusp of the Digital Age: A Credo,” 
Research Library Issues: A Bimonthly Report 

june10b.indd   290 5/27/2010   9:12:17 AM



June 2010  291 C&RL News

from ARL, CNI and SPARC 267 (Decem-
ber 2009), publications.arl.org/pageview 
/prvp3/4.

8. Shannon D. Smith, Gail Salaway, and 
Judith Borreson Caruso, The ECAR Study of 
Undergraduate Students and Information 
Technology, 2009 (Boulder, CO: Educause 
Centre for Applied Research, 2009), www.
educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ers0906/rs 
/ERS0906w.pdf. 

9. Joan K. Lippincott, “Mobile Reference: 
What are the Questions?” The Reference Li-
brarian 51,1 (2010): 1-11, www.cni.org/staff/
joanpubs/mobile.RefLibn.final.pdf.

10. 2CUL Web site: www.2cul.org/;  
HathiTrust Web site: www.hathitrust.org/.

11. Lynn Silipigni Connaway and Timothy 
J. Dickey, Towards a Profile of the Researcher 
of Today: What Can We Learn from JISC 
Projects? Common Themes Identified in an 
Analysis of JISC Virtual Research Environ-
ment and Digital Repository Projects (2010), 
2, http://ie-repository.jisc.ac.uk/418/2/Virtu-
alScholar_themesFromProjects_revised.pdf.

12. Ibid.
13. SPARC Web site: www.arl.org/sparc/.
14. L ynn Silipigni Connaway and 

Timothy J. Dickey, The Digital Infor-
mation Seeker: Report of Findings from 
Selected OCLC, RIN, and JISC User Be-
havior Pr ojects (2010), 32, www.jisc.
ac.uk/media/documents/publications 
/reports/2010/digitalinformationseeker-
report.pdf.

Additional sources
Connaway, Lynn Silipigni. 2008. “Make 

room for the Millennials.” NextSpace 10: 18-
19. www.oclc.org/nextspace/010/research.
htm. 

Connaway, Lynn Silipigni. 2007. “Moun-
tains, valleys, and pathways: Serials users’ 
needs and steps to meet them.” Part I: Identi-
fying serials users’ needs: Preliminary analysis 
of focus group and semi-structured interviews 
at colleges and universities. Serials Librarian 
52 (1/2): 223-236. www.oclc.org/research 
/publications/archive/2007/connaway 
-serialslibrarian.pdf. 

Connaway, Lynn Silipigni, and Marie L. 
Radford. 2007. “Service sea change: Clicking 
with Screenagers through virtual reference.” 
In H. Thompson (Ed.), Sailing into the fu-
ture: Charting our destiny: proceedings of 
the Thirteenth National Conference of the 
Association of College and Research Librar-
ies, March 29-April 1, 2007, Baltimore, 
Maryland. Chicago: Association of College 
and Research Libraries. www.oclc.org/research 
/publications/archive/2007/connaway-acrl.pdf.

Connaway, Lynn Silipigni, Marie L. Rad-
ford, and Timothy J. Dickey. 2008. “On the 
trail of the elusive non-user: What research in 
virtual reference environments reveals.” ASIST 
Bulletin 34(2): 25–28. www.asis.org/Bulletin
/Dec-07/DecJan08_Connaway_etc.pdf.

Connaway, Lynn Silipigni, Marie L. Rad-
ford, Timothy J. Dickey, Jocelyn DeAngelis 
Williams, and Patrick Confer. 2008. “Sense-
making and synchronicity: Information-
seeking behaviors of Millennials and Baby 
Boomers.” Libri 58(2): 123–35. www.oclc.
org/research/publications/archive/2008 
/connaway-libri.pdf.

Connaway, Lynn Silipigni, Marie L. 
Radford, and Jocelyn DeAngelis Williams. 
2009. Engaging Net Gen students in virtual 
reference: Reinventing services to meet their 
information behaviors and communication 
preferences. In D. M. Mueller (Ed.), Pushing 
the edge: Explore, extend, engage: Proceed-
ings of the Fourteenth National Conference 
of the Association of College and Research 
Libraries, March 12-15, 2009, Seattle, Wash-
ington (pp. 10–27). Chicago: Association 
of College and Research Libraries. www.
oclc.org/research/publications/archive/2009 
/connaway-acrl-2009.pdf.

Cordes, Sean. 2009. “Adult learners: 
How IT can support ‘new’ students.” EDU-
CAUSE Quarterly, 32,1. www.educause.edu
/EDUCAUSE%2BQuarterly/EDUCAUSE 
QuarterlyMagazineVolum/AdultLearnersHow-
ITCanSupportNe/163869 (accessed April 5, 
2010).

Council on Library and Information Re-
sources. 2008. “No brief candle: Reconceiv-
ing research libraries for the 21st century.” 

june10b.indd   291 5/27/2010   9:12:17 AM



C&RL News June 2010  292

Washington D.C.: CLIR. www.clir.org/pubs/
reports/pub142/pub142.pdf (accessed April 
5, 2010).

Dew, John. 2010. “Global, mobile, virtual, 
and social: The college campus of tomorrow.”
The Futurist, March/April, 46-50. mobile-
libraries.blogspot.com/2010/02/global-mo-
bile-virtual-and-social.html (accessed April 
5, 2010).

Frye Leadership Institute. www.fryeinsti-
tute.org/. 

Head, J. Alison and Michael B. Eisenberg. 
2009. “Lessons learned: how college students 
seek information in the digital age.” Project 
information literacy progress report. The In-
formation School, University of Washington. 
projectinfolit.org/pdfs/PIL_Fall2009_Year1Re-
port_12_2009.pdf (accessed April 5, 2010).

Hendrix, Jennifer C. 2010. “Checking 
out the future perspectives from the library 
community on information technology and 
21st century libraries.” Washington D.C.: ALA 
Offi ce of Information Technology Policy. con-
nect.ala.org/fi les/69099/ala_checking_out_
the_pdf_93915.pdf (accessed April 5, 2010).

Livingstone, Alan. 2009. “The revolution 
no one noticed: mobile phones and multi-
mobile services in higher education.” EDU-
CAUSE Quarterly, 32.1. www.educause.edu
/ E D U C A U S E + Q u a r t e r l y / E D U C A U S E
QuarterlyMagazineVolum/TheRevolution-
NoOneNoticedMobil/163866 (accessed April 
5, 2010).

Malenfant, Kara. J. 2010. “Leading change 
in the system of scholarly communication: A 
case study of engaging liaison librarians for 
outreach to faculty.” College and Research 
Libraries 71.1: 63-76. www.ala.org/ala/mgrps
/divs/acrl/publications/crljournal/preprints
/Malenfant.pdf (accessed April 5, 2010).

Michalko, James, Constance Malpas, and 
Arnold Arcolio. 2010. “Research libraries, 
risk and systemic change.” www.oclc.org
/research/publications/library/2010/2010-03.
pdf.

Oblinger, Diana G. 2010. “From the campus 
to the future.” EDUCAUSE Quarterly, 45.1:42-
52. www.educause.edu/EDUCAUSE+Review
/EDUCAUSEReviewMagazineVolume45

/FromtheCampustotheFuture/195801 (ac-
cessed April 5, 2010).

Palfrey, John and Urs Gasser. 2008. Born 
digital: Understanding the fi rst generation of 
digital natives. New York: Basic Books.

Schonfeld, Roger C. and Ross House-
wright. 2009. “Documents for a Digital De-
mocracy: A Model for the Federal Depository 
Library Program in the 21st Century.” Ithaka 
S+R [report]. www.arl.org/bm~doc/docu-
ments-for-a-digital-democracy.pdf (accessed 
April 5, 2010).

Schonfeld, Roger C. and Ross House-
wright. 2010. “Faculty Survey 2009: Stra-
tegic Insights for Librarians, Publishers, 
and Societies.” www.ithaka.org/ithaka-s-r
/research/faculty-surveys-2000-2009/faculty
-survey-2009. 

Upcoming ACRL e-learning events
Registration is now open for the following 
e-learning opportunities from ACRL. Stretch 
your professional development budget by 
registering now for these affordable dis-
tance learning events! Space is limited, so 
register now to reserve your seat! 

Instructional Design for Online Teaching 
and Learning (Online Seminar: June 28 - 
July 30, 2010)

Promoting Information Literacy through a 
Better Designed Learning User Experience 
(Live Webcast: June 28, 2010)

Introduction to Web site Usability (Online 
Seminar: July 12-30, 2010)

Marketing Ideas That Work in Academic 
Libraries: Pecha Kucha Presentations (Live 
Webcast: July 13, 2010)

Check In with Location Based Mobile 
Services: Foursquare and Libraries (Live 
Webcast: July 20, 2010)

Complete details and registration infor-
mation on all upcoming events are avail-
able on the ACRL e-Learning Web site at 
www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/acrl/events
/elearning.

june10b.indd   292 5/27/2010   9:12:18 AM