Library Services for Literatures, Languages and Linguistics Survey November 2009 Purpose: The Languages and Literatures Planning Team, formed in Fall 2009 as part of the University Library’s New Service Model Program, was charged to develop "a broad‐based understanding of the existing and emerging information needs of students and scholars engaged in the study of languages, linguistics and literatures; and then to make recommendations on how to best support these areas of study in the current environment" <http://www.library.illinois.edu/nsm/lit/index.html>. The Team created a survey as a means to gather input to inform their recommendations. The survey instrument is posted at <http://www.library.illinois.edu/nsm/lit/Lit_Survey.pdf . Participants & Methods: The survey opened 8 am on Friday November 6 and closed on midnight November 16, 2009. Invitations to respond to the survey were sent to the following groups and mailing lists: 

English Department faculty, graduate students and undergraduate leaders School of Literatures, Cultures and Linguistics faculty and graduate students. Department heads were asked to forward the invitation to undergraduate majors  Humanities Council  Cinema Studies mailing list  Arts & Humanities Division and Special Collections Division in the University Library The University of Illinois Web Services survey tool was used to mount the survey online, and respondents were required to authenticate themselves via Bluestem login as currently affiliated members of the University of Illinois community. 81 individuals responded to the survey. Because there is no way of ascertaining the number of people who received an invitation to respond, the overall response rate cannot be determined. However, the rate of response can be estimated for some categories. For example, 19.7% of the English Department faculty (12 of 61 visiting and tenure system faculty) and 33% of the Germanic Languages and Literatures faculty (3 of 9) responded to the survey. Results: The results of the survey are summarized in this document. Demographic and categorical responses have been graphed, while all open‐ended responses are presented in their entirety. The full text of the responses to all open‐ended questions were also uploaded to Many Eyes <http://manyeyes.alphaworks.ibm.com/manyeyes/datasets?q=Lit%20Survey>, where they can be explored using visualizations (tag clouds and word trees) that show word frequencies and allow you to drill down to see commonly used terms in the context of the original sentence or phrase. If you have trouble viewing the visualizations, you may need to download this Java Plugin. 1 Q1. My status at the University of Illinois is: Eighty‐one individuals responded to the survey. One of these identified themselves as both a graduate student and a faculty member and is counted in both categories in the figure above. Q2. Primary Department 2 Q3. Other departmental/program/unit affiliations: Beckman Institute; Computer Science Cinema studies WAGR, Council on Teacher Education Unit for Criticism and Theory Unit for Criticism and Interpretive Theory Medieval Studies EU Center English, French American Indian Studies, the Unit for Criticism and Interpretive Theory, and Writing Studies Chemistry Beckman Cinema Studies Unit for Criticism and Interpretive Theory, Program in Comparative and World Literature Unit for criticism, Gender and Women Studies English Center for Writing Studies Program for Jewish Culture and Society, Gender and Women's Studies Medieval Studies, Comparative & World Lit, Unit for Criticism & Interpretive Theory Gender and Women's Studies I‐CHASS Mathematics Medieval studies Gender and Women's Studies, Institute of Communications Research, Unit for Criticism and Interpretive Theory Cinema Studies Dept. of Media and Cinema Studies, Program on Women and Gender, Center for Writing Studies SLATE Geography Center for Writing Studies Comparative and World Lit., Jewish Studies ARTH Chemistry Medieval Studies, Theatre Unit for Criticism English, German, Slavic, French CWL, Unit for Criticism and Interpretive Theory REEEC Atmospheric Sciences Education Cinema‐Film Comparative Literature, Gender & Women's Studies, Unit, Jewish Studies, European Center Unit for Cinema Studies, Unit for Criticism and Interpretive Theory Latina/Latino Studies, Latin American and Caribbean studies, gender and womens studies, unit for criticism and interpretative theory, Jewish culture and society, global studies 3 Q4. Which libraries within the University Library do you use? (Please select all that apply) 4 Q5. How often do you visit these libraries in person? English Modern Languages Other libraries 5 Q6. How often do you visit these libraries via the Library website? English Modern Languages Other libraries 6 Q7. Why do you visit the library in person? (Please select all that apply) English Modern Languages Other libraries 7 Q8. Other reasons for visiting the library in person (please specify): See also the interactive visualizations of these responses on Many Eyes. To print documents. Basically, I have no reason to visit the library in person. I use the permanent reference collections a lot as well, though certainly less as time goes on and more material goes on line. Browse shelves around a book I might need for a wider understanding of publications on the topic. Use copier in Modern Languages & Linguistics Use reference works in my field that are only available in the library itself Group projects I usually have books delivered to my campus mailbox. But sometimes I want things faster than that, and sometimes in multi‐volume resources it is impossible to figure out what single volume should be delivered. And some multi‐volume books‐‐especially things like calendars of state papers‐‐need to browse on site. In general, when I'm doing new research I often want to spend some time browsing. So I'll look up 3‐4 books that I know are important to my topic and then stack browse around them wherever they may be. Writing space As a Teaching Assistant, I take students to visit the library and learn to make use of its resources. Making photocopies of journal articles, picking up requested material from I‐Share so that I get it more quickly The English Library new books shelf of new library acquisitions in my field, and the journals room of journals in my field. I would also like to emphasize how much I value the specialized library staff! In a library is also a good meeting place to study or work on group projects. To introduce students to the library system To read microfilm of newspapers Journals only available there. Most recent newspapers in print. Talk to staff to get best databases and order new books. Getting materials for teaching: picking up and returning videos in the Undergrad /Media Center‐‐I'm a media scholar and use videos in every class. I also pick up books I've just discovered of interest to my teaching that wouldn't arrive in time via campus mail or those sent from interlibrary loan that haven't been sent to my campus address Pick up a/v materials for teaching. Keeping up with my field (although I am retired and would not need to do so) To collect books to place on reserve for my classes. I take at least one class per semester for a library research workshop with the English Librarian, which usually takes place in English Library. I browse habitually, and often request that an ILL book be delivered to the main library only, so that I'm forced to go to the main stacks. Printing I need to browse shelves. The effects of contiguity on the shelf cannot easily be duplicated by electronic searches. When I visit the stacks, I can see things at a glance that would require multiple searches online. Certain resources are only available at MLL Library. To consult reference works in my field. I like being around the books ‐ I love libraries! 8 Q9. If you use more than one unit library for your research, study, or teaching, please describe in what ways those separate libraries as currently configured make it easier or harder to accomplish your work, and whether a different configuration would improve your experience at the Library. See also the interactive visualizations of the these responses on Many Eyes. I use the main stacks and the English library. Because they're so close together, I don't mind going to both places to check out or browse books. Through the online catalog it is easy to find where materials are located, and I don't mind walking to other libraries. To the contrary, I find it interesting, and I think it is important to stay in touch with the layout and collections of other libraries, particularly so I can advise my students. Don't get me started..... 1) Access to children's books I do historical research with children's books (most published in the early‐mid 20th century) and SO FEW of them are now in the library (in the library or in storage) and SO MANY are in Oak Street. The collection is enormous‐‐a real point of pride when we talk about the UIUC's libraries, but with so many books either in Oak St or uncataloged I might as well *not* be on the campus with the 2nd largest children's lit collection in the U.S. I can't get at them and can't browse them, and most of the ones I want are in Oak Street, so 2 days away from being available. In terms of access, there are times when I know I should just drive to Illinois State and use their collection. It would take me 60‐80 minutes to get to the ISU campus, get parked, get into the library, and get my hands on what I need. There is a big difference between the 60‐80 minutes and 2 days. 2) Access to LIS materials, especially older ones relating to children and school and public libraries. The closing of the LIS library has meant that I no longer have ready access to the materials I need. They are dispersed among Ed, Communications, History, the stacks, and Oak Street. I like the fact that the Modern Languages Library is separate from the main library because is is easier to handle. All the recent materials, including journals, are available there I don't believe it would impact my research one way or the other. While most of the resources I need for my literary research are at MLLL, a great many are at the EL, especially those on Arthurian literature. Thus typically I need to go to both libraries. Of course, for the bulk of materials, I go to the Main Stacks. The current configuration works well, especially because specialized librarians maintain the collections current in each field. It is wonderful to have so many books related to my field(s) concentrated in one area, since I don't have to spend so much time negotiating my way through the main stacks. Also it is an enormous asset to have librarians who specialize in one particular area right there, next to the books. The Classics Library is conveniently located in the Main Library. I always loved having many English journals in one place, but in recent years, with so many journals online, that's no big deal. I am comfortable with consolidation so long as it does not reduce access and does not mean that the person making purchasing decisions doesn't know the area well. Other than my home library (where I work), I primarily use other libraries in person on my research days. ACES, and to a lesser extent Grainger, have the computing setup necessary and comfortable places to write/read/work. I like the intimacy of the English library, and have found the librarians there extremely useful for my research. I have also sent undergraduates to the English library, especially for the librarians' help on honors theses. The other library I use on a regular basis is the Rare Books Library, both for my own research and for my teaching. I regularly bring upper‐level literature courses there, and the librarians and facilities are excellent. I do wish English and History, as allied fields, were closer in the library, but I have not been hampered by the distance. I use Classics for research, course reserves, locating books & journals etc. and would like to do all of my 9 research and writing there but the space is terrible (cramped, old and uncomfortable furniture etc.) so I often go to Grainger or Aces with my material in order to enjoy a comfortable environment. The Classics collection at UIUC is a nation treasure that is stored in a barn ‐ a shame. I have no trouble with the current configuration. However, I think another configuration would be possibly even better: the English and Modern Languages Libraries could be combined‐‐in a bigger, more accessible, nicer setting, ideally with places to set up and plug in laptop computers. I think users would come much more often to such a setting. I like to study in the main reference room because it is well lit with big tables. It does not have enough plugs for my laptop, however. I like to work in the English library for the same reasons, but it is frequently very hot in there. I find it difficult that things I want might be in a unit library (history, English, etc) but that other closely related things might be in the main stacks. Makes it harder to feel one has a comprehensive sense of the resources for a given topic. The expertise of the reference librarians in each area deeply facilitates my successful mining of each resource. I am skeptical a generalist who have the depth of knowledge sufficient to guide me in the specifics of each area. I don't see the strong separation between libraries that this survey implies. As a researcher, I look for materials ‐‐ where those materials are is of little interest to me. In terms of research and study, I pretty much only use the English library and the main stacks. I enjoy studying in the history and philosophy library because it's a comfortable environment. I appreciate how the English library has everything I need in one place, and feel that combining it with other units would make it difficult to browse the shelves, as well as for the staff to be as well versed in the needs of the English department as they currently are. Right now they're an excellent resource for us, but if they are forced to also handle the needs of other fields/departments, their expertise and ability to serve all the areas in question would suffer. Keeping libraries smaller also allows for quieter environments for studying. Combining libraries would mean more traffic in individual libraries, and thus would be less conducive for studying. Whenever I make a trip to the library to gather books or articles, I spend time moving between the Main Stacks, English, Modern Languages, Classics, and History Philosophy a& Newspaper. At present I feel that merging English with Modern Languages would make materials I use frequently more conveniently located for me, but I don't know if that is true for everyone. The English Library's arrangement of current journal issues makes is enormously helpful: in a single visit I feel as though I can efficiently keep abreast of a broad range of articles in my field. That kind of browsing is much more clumsy and time consuming electronically. I also feel as though it is indispensable to be able to browse books in the English Library and main stacks, both for glancing at a large number of books that might be beneficial to my work and for making serendipitous finds. Everyone I know in the humanities has a story of a serendipitous find in the stacks. The way the libraries I mostly use (English, Undergrad, and Main circulation) work great the way they are configured currently. I have no suggestions to change them. It is significantly easier to use the specialized libraries. I can request books online from other libraries; but I enjoy going to the History library to use microfilm and to discuss research questions, and the English library to develop my research in a focused way with the invaluable support of the staff. The way the smaller libraries (such as Modern Languages) are contained within the Main Library building makes it easy to get all my resources for a research paper in one trip rather than having to trek around campus. I used the main stacks a lot just to retrieve books, because that's the fastest way to get them. When I have reference questions I always go to the Slavic library. I appreciate the amount of privacy, seclusion, and comfortable atmosphere provided by the current system. It does get occasionally uncomfortably warm, though. With the loss of the LIS library physical space, and no provision made to keep the journal collection together the current journals are now scattered across the campus. Thus it is harder for me to keep current by scanning the new periodicals. There was strong faculty support to keep the new periodical 10 bookshelf in one place. This was ignored. It is very convenient to have Modern Languages in one place, but my biggest complaint is that it is so hard to work there for long periods of time because the room is unpleasant due to budget cuts. I spend most of my time at the Champaign Public Library because the environment is more conducive to work, even though they have no materials that I need. Newspaper/Historical library: I use the microfilm readers on microfilm readers a lot‐‐much enjoy the new room there but find it now VERY CROWDED with all the books (much more crowded than initially, of course) and also rather NOISY: the STAFF at the checkout desk and sometimes visitors to the other offices houses there tend to talk rather loudly (or in 'normal' plus a little volume) in the open space near the microfilm readers. Modern Languages and Linguistics seems to cover all my needs. I always use the LLBA index for research. I visit separate libraries because they each have different qualities. If I want to study with a group, I'll study at the Undergraduate. If I want to look for books first, I'll go to the Main Library. I miss the gender and women's studies library. I wish there was a space that collected the library's feminist materials. I find the English library to be very easy to use. I always find what I need. I love this library. I find the newspaper microfilm collection easy to use. Also a great resource for me. As a film studies professor, I use the undergraduate library's DVD collection regularly. I find the system of reserving DVDs very difficult. Even when I put films on reserve for my class I can't count on them being there. Yet, ironically, when I need to check films out to prepare my lectures, it's difficult to keep the films for as long as I need them. Frankly, I end up using That's Rentertainment and my own personal collection more than the library because of how unreliable the library is. I recommend that the library consider setting up an ad hoc committee composed of students, cinema/media studies faculty, and librarians to study and then revise the system. despite my regular frustration with using this collection, it is a fabulous collection and I really appreciate how willing the library is to purchase materials I need for my teaching. It is a great resource, it is just hard to access!!! The Undergraduate Library can become extremely noisy, just with the constant bustle of people. The ACES library is very quiet and bright, but closes at 11 pm which keeps me from going there. Grainger is often extremely crowded, making it unpleasant to visit. As I mainly use the reference collections in these libraries, I appreciate that these books do not circulate. While I realize that it was necessary to make more in the stacks, I liked the immediate access to older materials (I did bibliography work > published annotated bibliographies of three authors writing in German (Friedrich Hebbel < German, Conrad Ferdinand Meyer and Gottfried Keller < Swiss The geology library is great! it has a good location, I use multiple types of resources there (journals, books, online library resources, for studying, for research) Because I study writing practices and technology, my work is interdisciplinary and I therefore need to use a variety of different libraries. Using 5 different libraries isn't an issue, since I can pick up books in a centralized location. I visit the Education and social sciences library most frequently. I do find, though, that given my interdisciplinary focus, I can't take advantage of the specialized services available at each library because of their narrow focus. Please please please please please do not change the current English library configuration. It's a beautiful space with a large percentage of the books I need in it, and accessible periodicals. The staff is known and cherished by many English faculty. We need real books that take up real space as well as all the very useful (but not totally reliable) electronic search supplements. Why can't the library give us both? The one thing you could add: more coffee! The current Espresso Royale is too far away and a bad workspace. While I can see the utility of combining Modern Languages & Linguistics with English (the plan I've heard bandied about most often), I would be reluctant to assent to such a combination unless sufficient space 11 were provided to avoid gutting both collections‐‐especially since I suspect that the earlier literatures on which I work would be the hardest hit by any consolidation of the two libraries. I use the English Library, Main Stacks, and Undergrad Library more than any others. Any inconvenience caused by separate trips is minimal, compared to the great utility of having access to expert subject librarians. Bluntly: the bottom line for me is no reduction in stack space. I don't passionately care about changes to configuration of that space. But when stack space is reduced to make way for offices and computers, it does irreparable damage to my research. I do digital humanities work. But I still need the stacks. The separate collections of stacks make it more difficult to access books to check out when I have a long list from different libraries‐‐it would be easier if they were all in the main stacks. BUT, for reference works and current journals, it is very convenient to be able to browse and access those in Slavic or in Modern Languages together as a unit. Finally, and most importantly, for recruiting graduate students and faculty, having the Slavic library is a HUGE plus‐‐its identity as a unit MUST be maintained in some form!!!!! I really don't know because I never thought about whether it was hard or easy to do research. I haven't had any big problems yet. Some of the film‐cinema ref. books (e.g., N Y Times Film Reviews) are in the Main Library. Reference Room (2d floor), rather than all being grouped together in the English Library. Online journals extremely useful as they allow freedom of access and flexibility and allow to see specific content before taking a trip to library; ability to check out books via main stacks At times, the distribution of materials across several libraries makes things challenging, but it is manageable. Plus, I'm not sure that an alternative configuration would reasonably resolve the problem 12 13 14 Q12. Do you feel the Library is currently meeting your needs for resources, both print and electronic? Q12b. If you answered no please explain: See also the interactive visualizations of these responses on Many Eyes I would like to see more materials made available online, and I would also like for their to be a different type of database for movies (etc.), so that it is easier to browse the titles ‐ currently you more or less have to know what you are looking for to find it. I find the biggest problem with the Library to be the lack of pleasant, ergonomically viable work space. I end up requesting things on‐line and working outside of the library much more than I prefer to, simply because of the lack of spaces to work in the stacks and the relative lack of comfort/quiet in spaces outside of the stacks. 1) see my answer to question #9. 2) My access to materials in the stacks is hampered by the lack of ability to bring my things into the stacks with me. For the most part, the Library does meet my needs. The ILL service is truly awesome, especially for journal articles. But to clarify: the online materials available are very fine, but I work in the 19th century, and a lot of our journals which the library has in hard copy are simply not available yet online. I'm also nervous about the long‐term viability of online collections. Some require very specific software (e.g. the Rossetti Archive at Virginia requires you to use Firefox software and won't work at all with Netscape). I'm afraid that the changes in technology won't always match the needs of the materials and the latter will be lost/unavailable. So please, please don't retire the hard copies of materials completely. By all means supplement them with electronic resources, but don't dump them altogether. The book, like the bicycle, is a very good technology in and of itself. The Library is slow in acquiring new books, poor in acquiring 'NENG' I would prefer all journals to be online, especially as pdfs. The Classics Library closes at 5p.m. on Fridays and Saturdays. Could it stay open longer? I understand the budget is tight, but the library is not keeping up with monographs published in my field (19c American literature, but I suspect this is a universal issue). I often have to get the books through I‐Share, which is not a huge difficulty but I worry signals a slide in the number and quality of holdings. I think the library is stupendous, and I want to keep it that way, which is why I hope we won't divert too much funding away from keeping up with scholarly books. Comfortable space for the Classics collection Unavailable DVDs I answered yes, but I'll use this space to complain anyway. The main stacks are horrible. Nowhere to 15 sit, poorly lit, crazily organized. Stack browsing is a major feature of a research library, and it is shockingly difficult to do here. Dewey instead of Library of Congress? Really? I constantly find articles and other materials that I cannot access via the web. This is annoying and interferes with my scholarship. Need fuller access to back issues of journals in my field online; many only go back a few years, and we should really make full runs available to online users if the presses have made them available electronically. There are numerous major digital collections (from Gale, ProQuest, etc.) that the Library does not own. See answer to question 9 The number of books‐‐even books from major academic presses such as Cambridge‐‐that must be ordered through I‐Share or ILL can sometimes be alarming. Without significant re‐investment in acquisitions, Illinois will lose its reputation for housing a great research collection. I hate that I cannot go into the stacks with a notebook and pen. I like to browse and skim through books to see if they might have relevant information. I cannot write down anything I find if I am not allowed to have a notebook/pen. I don't always find it necessary to check out a book that may only have one or two bits of useful information. It seems that lately fewer of the new books I would expect to be purchased by the library are being purchased. I may just be looking for them too soon, but I do have some concern that the budget has been cut so much that important new books are not being purchased. I have problems when I try to check out a book that is critical to my research, but it is on reserve for a class. Then the library refuses to order me a copy from another institution even though the reserve copy places too many restrictions to be of use to my research. In my teaching and researching media, I am often frustrated that videos previously available in the Media Center gone 'missing' (overdue for weeks or 'lost' and not replaced); checked out (and renewed multiple times) or damaged (some replaceable materials). I understand that changes in media center policy (open stacks with student checkout, now renewable) respond to 'multiple patrons' rather than primarily to instructors/faculty needs (as prior to about 5 years ago). I do appreciate that the Media Center staff responds professionally and quickly to requests for searches for 'lost titles' and orders replacements quickly when available. When requested, the desk staff does try to retrieve overdue items and hold off on repeated renewals. But the policy has gone too far in the direction of student‐
centered (mostly recreational) use and needs reconsideration to better support the needs of media teaching (beyond putting videos on reserve for one semester). My needs are curtailed because of retirement. I do an occasional book review, serve on one doctoral committee. New books that circulate are almost immediately out of commission for an extended period of time, with no easy recall mechanism: essentially only the first reader gets to see them in a timely way. The books I seek are usually not duplicated in CARLI, and the extended circulation period is a real impediment to my research. The loss of books & journals to Oak Street makes it more difficult for me to browse Romantic‐era periodicals. I'd like to see more resources put toward expanding the Czech and Slovak literature holdings. It has not historically been as central as Russian or Ukrainian, but it looks like I will be doing research in this area here for some time to come, so it would be nice to fill in some gaps, keep up with current monographs, etc. I have been quite pleased with the library services and value them highly. Having said that, however, there are some needs that are not currently met. There is little to no adequate space to study, work, or peruse material while browsing in the stacks. 16 Q13. Through its participation in initiatives such as the Google Books project , the Open Content Alliance and other partnerships , the University of Illinois has access to a growing body of digitized texts, as well as computational resources for analyzing these texts. a) Do you anticipate that this will have an impact on your research, study, and/or teaching? Q13b. Please describe how you might use digitized texts, or why they aren't relevant to your research and teaching. See also the interactive visualizations of these responses on Many Eyes. It would be nice to use the 'Find' function of pdf files in my research to help me find key words faster. As far as teaching goes, having access to online texts could make course materials a lot cheaper for students, and they could decide whether or not they wanted to print everything... I will probably still see the library as a first place to go when I need a text, rather than trying to find it online. Maybe I’m old‐fashioned, but I would rather browse a bookshelf than surf the web. I'm a first‐year PhD student and am still trying to narrow my interests, but if the digitized texts are relevant to my research, I know that would be extremely useful. I will search and read digitized texts online. This is incredibly useful. Why is Google Books blocked on the library search page? I feel like digitization is being forced upon us, so obviously it's going to change things, it's just hard to envision how. I also do not at all trust Google. I use the Thesaurus Linguae Graecae. It is wonderful! I do historical research and so need out of print books and older journals (approx. 1900‐1960). I'd prefer to have these immediately available, but they are usually not‐‐they are in Oak Street and waiting 2 or 3 days is sometimes ok but most often not. If I had digitized out of print texts (books or journals) available, I assume I would be able to have immediate access to them. I already use Google Books almost daily because they have old first editions readily available that would take forever to order by ILL. The more that's available on them the better. Anything to make texts more readily available is helpful. Research and reading I always use digitized journal articles for all my classes. I read them and if I need to I go to the library and print them. When reading lengthy printed material (book or article) I prefer to have it in print, but when I need to refer to an excerpt quickly and I don't have the printed copy at hand, digitized texts are very convenient. They're also useful for keyword searches to locate particular passages or to search for sources. I'd use them in the same way I used print books now, it's just that the access would be easier. 17 I frequently use online, open access books and journal articles in my research, particular for 19c editions of medieval literary texts and for journals that the Library doesn't own. To have an electronic, searchable version of many books would cut down enormously on hours of questionably productive, tedious work. This is not to say that print copies would be any less useful, however. It would be helpful if I need only to print out a chapter or small section of a book rather than having to check it out. The search function is incredibly valuable. On the other hand, I fear that Google Books will reduce the incentive for publishers to continue to publish books, and that can be terribly damaging. My research relies more on journal literature and less on monographs. I would probably use them for research papers or experiments. Digitized texts are essential to my research because they allow me to keyword search either individual books or all available digital articles for a chapter or article on a particular subject. Google Books and Google Scholar (especially when combined with access to the full text of articles through the University Library online) are essential to discovering new research sources for me. I already use a great number of digitized texts for my research, which demands access to out‐of‐print 19c. texts. I use them for research, though the limit is always in not being able to see how they look and their marginalia in person. The power of search will enable my research to be more thorough and accurate. This is a major plus. I would imagine that using digitized texts will improve my research. I would be able to absorb and use much more information than I can currently, and using attributes such as searchable databases and text‐
search functions would potentially objectively improve the quality and robustness of my work. I do not think digitized texts should replace the printed book, but they would constitute a welcome enhancement. I use digitized texts constantly and consider them to be an asset to my research. They are particularly useful when I am working on novels which have been out of print for 150 years, and I am afraid I'll hurt the library's copy by physically looking at it. I also use journals almost exclusively online. I use online databases for searching through massive amounts of information (with Google Books you can search for, say, Joyce and dentistry and find out if anyone has put these things together: they have), but I still require a paper copy of a book or article that I really want to read and understand. Can cover more ground more quickly, and searches become possible. I prefer digitized materials and other electronic sources. All of my work is done this way. Digitized texts are great since they allow 24‐hour access, as well as access to popular books that may already be checked out of the library and through the ILCSO system. They also save a significant amount of paper and, of course, are much more portable. I've used digitized texts for my research, especially for older or hard to find texts. For example, if I'm looking for a particular edition of a book of poetry from the 1870s, or if I need to search for a phrase in Ruskin's Stones of Venice, I've found that digitized texts are useful for that. I find it very helpful in doing quick fact checks and seeing what a book or article is about, but I still need to have a print copy to read more carefully and thoroughly. I have actually had trouble using texts in Google Books because of missing pages and badly scanned images that make text unreadable. Since only one version of a book is available through Google Books, if that version is corrupted, the book is useless. It depends on whether there is cross‐searchability within the repository and the ability to search content, not just metadata. Currently OCA offers search of metadata, but content can only be searched within one item at a time. This drastically reduces the utility of the Internet Archive. It seems as if the promise of digitization is not being fulfilled. Having digital surrogates for individual works is nice, but until search capabilities are improved, it's not transformative change. I may be simply forced to access texts electronically, though I have no inclination to do so and do not see the advantage in doing so. I may turn to a digitized book when I need immediate access to it, or if it is unavailable in our library or over I‐Share or IRRC. However, I prefer to use hard copies of texts rather than digitized forms. 18 Using digitized texts is important for finding texts on a theme. For example, my dissertation is about technology in literature, and I can use Proquest to find which journals are most relevant. However, I prefer hard copies and/or microfilm once I get into my intensive research, to get a more rigorous understanding of the text beyond the articles that show up in my general searches. I would reference digitized resources for my class research papers. Well it is just nice when you can get the books you need without leaving your desk. I prefer to actually check the books out and read them sometimes, but I find Google books very useful. Especially because you can search for certain words in the book. They are extremely helpful as reference and citation in my studies, as well as make access to such materials possible in remote locations/off campus. However, the availability of the physical book at our libraries is important as well. course assignments. research. current awareness. I hate reading things online or on a computer screen ‐ I find it impossible to do for any sustained period of time. If I can get a print copy, I would much rather read/use that, both for research and instruction purposes. key word searches of books through Google Books is a huge help in my research. basically, any way to use computers to better access both print and on‐line materials is extremely useful to my research and teaching. Good to have this available option so a text can be scanned for specific terms on a search, but I also need the book made available in print. I use gateway access to Proquest and other digitized databases very frequently in my teaching and research, but I find I must exhort students ever more assiduously to consult materials not yet (or some ever likely to be) digitized‐‐even GRAD students doing historiographic research, who are too easily content with finding snippets of information on‐line without the contexts of publication or full citations. Easier access = I will use them more! My research involves the study of literature as primary sources. I sometimes access Google Books for certain texts that are very old and no longer in print. It is easier to access the texts and decreases the time spent searching for books. I can also use them from anyplace as long as I have my laptop and makes for more organized studying. This would help me find a text instantly for research, but if I wanted to read the print form of the book because its easier on the eyes, I would need access to that as well. As a 'has‐been', who used print media during all of my career, I am still not a great friend of electronic media. sometimes they are hard to access off campus (and in general ‐ sometimes there are problems downloading documents). I use them for research Digitized texts are fantastically convenient, amazingly useful, but the partial nature of presentation of texts under copyright (and‐‐for reasons I don't understand‐‐a huge number of texts NOT under copyright) can be frustrating. On the other hand, partial viewing allows one to assess the work reasonably well before ordering a library or personal copy for research. For historical material, especially from periodicals, online access can be fabulous. I think digitized texts would be good for a quick reference, especially if they're searchable. I like accessing journal articles online, and I often print them out. I see myself doing this less with book length project. increasingly It allows access to books not in University libraries and also if I wanted to skim it quickly to make sure its relevant or need the information right away, it's helpful to see the text ahead of time. The ones that are available online are sometimes useful. However it's hard to cite them if you can't tell which pages are being referred to. Sometimes I have had to search out a hard copy to make my citation reliable. So far I would describe the utility of digitization as such: great for locating discussions of my topic in 19 monographs and essay collections, worthless for actually reading those discussions. Google Books is essentially a slightly more informative database than the MLA Bibliography, but I wouldn't give it any more credit than that. I never read monographs on screen, but I often search ones I've already read on paper for key words, passages, etc. I look forward to being able to annotate online texts. I use online journals almost exclusively, but only in PDF format. I'm using Zotero to build a personal library/database of journal articles for my various projects. I absolutely do use digitized texts in my research ‐‐ not just by reading them, but because I have been collaborating with people here working on, for instance, the MONK project. I pay close attention to developments in digital humanities. But none of that in any way reduces my need for books in the stacks. When I talk about shelf browsing, I'm not talking about nostalgia. I'm talking about an extremely efficient search technology that has not yet been adequately replaced. Other things supplement it, but I haven't seen a replacement. Please, please, please, please, please do not reduce the total space devoted to easily accessible printed books. I haven't used digitized texts a lot yet but I think they will become more important and ubiquitous. My more intensive use of digitized texts, however, will depend on the quality of the digitization and the text edition. For the time being, however, I'm happy to rely on and work with hard copies. Thus far, the kind of materials I most need access to for research are not included in the digitization projects‐‐foreign language texts, monographs, old journals, etc. I might use digitized texts to enhance my research experience. Digitalizing texts greatly increases accessibility through the use of the internet. Unknown. it allows greater access to printed resources that constitute the basis of my research, faster to consult than wait for ILL or world cat delivery when unavailable at campus library Texts would be more accessible and more easily searched. This function would allow me to cull a large corpus of material looking for specific terms or themes that might not appear as keywords, to retrieve a specific quotation or reference, and‐‐in some cases‐‐to assign or share materials with students. 20 Q14. I think the following would improve my Library experience (Please select all that apply): English Modern Languages Other libraries 21 Q14b. Please feel free to specify how any of the above could be improved (e.g., what hours would better suit your schedule? What would improve the Library environment?) See also the interactive visualizations of these responses on Many Eyes. I've been happy with the above library services! (My main suggestions for improvement are with the usability of the website, but that would be another survey entirely.) Weekend. #1 priority for me (see #9 for further info) Having more of the materials I need directly accessible (not in Oak Street) #2 priority for me Having knowledgeable staff available Two things: I long for greater availability just before semester starts, and at night and on the weekends. That's the time when faculty continue to do research because the students are 'recreating'!! The more pleasant and helpful the library assistants at the Main desk the better. Grumps in a library should be consigned backstage! I often think people are grumpy because there are too few of them and they're under pressure. ($$$$ Alas $$$) A more streamlined and consistent online catalog and website would be the greatest single desideratum. The designers are obviously more interested in design and experimentation than in the user. They do not appear themselves to be users of a library. More evening and weekend hours at the Slavic Library Open until late at night, midnight for instance. I think overall the libraries provide a great environment for studying and research, but sometimes it's very hot ‐‐ better temperature control would be helpful. I think the librarians already are very responsive, and I since I use the library's materials exclusively on‐
line now, these things don't impact my use of the library. None of the above is necessary. I find it crazy that there are thousands of important titles that, being in English or Modern Languages, are inaccessible at 4:30 on a Saturday afternoon. The Classics Library has a marvelous collection, but is cramped and has little space for reading and study. I clicked better hours, but of course better hours are better. Not a useful question. Are better hours important? Not to me. The questions just ask if things would help they don't ask if they'd help a lot or a little. Some of the library is in bad shape. Some of the library is in worse than bad shape. Open earlier I would like a clearer sense of why books were in unit libraries as opposed to the main stacks, I would like to have the main stacks be made much more user‐friendly, and I would like none of my materials shipped off to repositories. Longer hrs during school holiday periods. Night hrs. in area libraries. I'm very happy with the services the library currently provides. Having more things directly browsable is nice, but not generally a problem. Staff (esp. at English, where I'm most likely to ask questions) are always extremely knowledgeable and willing to help. The student workers are very diligent and helpful, but they simply don't have the expertise of a Kathleen Kluegel or a Connie Santarelli. fragmentation of reference collections is a hindrance I would love to see the current libraries expanded so more books are readily available, rather than the closing/reduction of library space and storage of books in remote locations. I wish the libraries were open later on Saturday, but I understand the financial constraints. 22 Later hours would better suit my schedule. In particular, it is hard for me to get to the Modern Languages library before closing on days when I have class all day and then dinner. Also, extended Sunday hours (possibly opening at 11 or staying open until 6?) would be helpful. I think the Graduate library hours are kind of short, especially on the weekends. I would like to be able to go before noon, maybe 9 or 10am. The main library should be open more hours at weekends. That is when most of the students actually have time to do their research. I also have a problem with the heating in the main library. Sometimes it is so hot it is almost unbearable. It seems that it would only be logical that the main stacks are open at the same hours as the undergraduate library (i.e. until midnight on most weekdays). Also, as many resources are only available in specific libraries, uniform hours would also be of benefit in the departmental libraries. While I understand that employee availability may vary among the departmental libraries, it would help if they shared the same hours as the building they are housed in, such as the main stacks. Also, staff has been generally knowledgeable and helpful, but it seems that some may not have been properly trained in the basic technology at the library (particularly copiers). Most people need to do research and studying on weekends and evenings ‐ library hours that were slightly later, or at least more hours on the weekends (say, 12‐5 instead of 1‐4) would really help. Also, I find that the study environment in Modern Language and Classics is dreadful ‐ far too cramped and with very few places to plug in a laptop. English is less cramped, but also lacks places to plug in computers. The study environment in history is much better. If all the libraries were like history, I would be more inclined to work there for sustained periods of time. More (and better!) photocopiers would also be a plus. Allowing students to enter stacks with notebooks and pencils/pens. the staff at the undergraduate library are not knowledgeable enough about the DVD check out system and how the particular needs of cinema/media faculty vary from the needs/interests of the average student. Library hours should follow campus rec hours. I can go to the gym more than I can use the library. Plus you need to be open before major breaks because I need to collect research before break starts such as the Monday‐Wednesday before Thanksgiving. MOST IMPORTANT: HOURS: Having the Undergrad open at 9 a.m. on Sun. instead of 10 a.m. would be a help, and the main library at noon at the latest, rather than 1 p.m. But mostly I could use more hours in the Newspaper library, especially on weekends (opening at 12 and staying open longer into the evening on Sunday) BETTER ENVIRONMENT: STACKS: need works to get returned to the shelves more quickly and have the piles of books on the floors throughout the stacks organized and made thus available. OAK STREET: I find I often need to order materials from there and need to recommend students to order up materials for which they must be patient. I would like to suggest that if a work has been ordered from OAK Street twice in a certain period, that the work get returned to the main collection. More evening and weekend hours for the English library would be nice. Keep the ACES library open later at night. I know that Oak Street cannot be reversed. I worked in 'annex libraries' elsewhere, e.g. at Princeton, during my 'biblio‐treks' (trying to autopsy all included items). Environment ‐‐ HVAC, lighting, humidity control, overall cleanliness I would spend That question was easy: more of everything, and perhaps some Turkish Delight! Maybe more hours on weekends and evenings. Fewer books in Oak Street. Stacks better maintained. Opening hours at the English Library that better suit my *students'* schedules ‐‐ at the moment, I have to locate my course reserve materials in the undergrad library, so that students working late can access them. Great that the undergrad library is open so late, bad that they miss out on expert advice. Later opening hours, and more hours on weekends, would help. One or two public desks in the stacks, with a light and a decent chair, so I can skim through books before checking them out. (Please note: 23 one desk on a floor will do ‐‐ I don't need a room devoted to this.) In general, the Library and the subject libraries are not spaces that 'seduce' the reader to linger, study, or read. Comfortable and modern interiors would greatly improve the perception of the library as a welcoming and social space. By this I do NOT suggest to remove the books but to make them available in a space in which it feels good to be. The hours are fine; I love the environment in every library; I never have problems with finding materials; the staff members seem to be knowledgeable, and I didn't know that you could make suggestions about what should be purchased yet. Q15. I wish that the libraries I use offered additional services, such as: See also the interactive visualizations of these responses on Many Eyes. None. I am extremely happy with most services. I am happy with the services currently available. The ability to add money/credits electronically or remotely from a computer to the I‐Card. MEDIA CENTER in Undergrad‐‐quicker tracking (stronger enforcement of return policy) and standard policy of replacement of video items not returned (rather than awaiting a faculty member's discovering an item has gone missing and having to order that‐‐if it's even available) the English library carries few journals in my field, and I have to rely on the individual subscriptions by my unit, the Center for Writing Studies. More desks and lights in the stacks. Are the stacks being deliberately neglected and under stocked to prepare the way for getting rid of them? I'm suspicious sometimes that librarians don't want us to use the stacks as much as we'd like. Less services might well be better. Library administration is obviously, probably necessarily, responsive to transitory pressures. I cannot think of any additional services I need at this time. Better copying. It is better and cheaper to go to Kinkos and the machines are better kept. They're so comprehensive that I don't know what else they should do. I would like the easier access to the stacks. support for adoption of tools of digital scholarship (advanced help in conceptualizing and executing projects incorporating GIS and other tools) extended hours. Free scanning of articles in journals that are not available online. Q16. What do you value most about the libraries that you use? If you have particular comments about the English Library or the Modern Languages Library, please make them here. See also the interactive visualizations of these responses on Many Eyes. The librarians in the Classics library ‐ they are magnificent. Their existence is invaluable. The physical space they occupy is very convenient. Please do not crowd them all together! The sheer range of material available at our libraries is the single greatest asset. Following closely behind are a staff of clerks and librarians that are, in my opinion, the friendliest and most helpful people with whom I have to deal at the University. The selection of titles available and the library environment...conducive to studying. I LOVE the following about the English Library: ‐‐Kathleen Kluegel's readiness to listen to acquisition suggestions ‐‐the way the web‐page has been arranged so that we know when new materials come in and have 24 links to it ‐‐the readiness of the librarians to help us with class visits and show the students what special aids are available. The staff in the English library is very helpful with research questions and I appreciate the English reference and new books sections that make it easy to find material specifically related to my field rather than looking through a larger, more general reference section. Size and range of the collection, above all. Online databases. Great interlibrary loan. The knowledge of the (best of the) information/reference staff. I would like clearer ways to offer purchasing input. The librarians at the English library. It's extremely valuable to me, not just as a scholar, but also for my undergraduate majors to go speak with librarians knowledgeable about our discipline. Connie is awesome! :) The knowledgeable and friendly staff‐‐ Kathleen Klugel is fantastic! The English librarian really makes an effort to meet the needs of every sub‐field within English literature, and it's so amazing to be able to just go to the library and find what I need without a lot of hassle. I like the English library for it's quiet and pleasant work environment and for its helpful staff. I value the quick and easy access to materials, ability to photocopy journal articles and book chapters quickly and easily, and the level of expertise of the people who work in these libraries and can help me locate the resources I need. Please see 9 above. Above all, I value the immense breadth and depth of our library's collection as a whole, and in the individual department libraries. One of the best aspects of the English library is the librarian. Kathleen Kluegel has helped fill in lacunae in my research, and the best part about librarians like Kathleen is that she continues to think about our needs even after the initial email. I've received suggestions for sources weeks after she already made some helpful suggestions, and this kind of attention is invaluable. I think that it's wonderful that the U of I puts such emphasis on the quality and scope of their library system. UIUC's library system is definitely a prestigious asset to the school, and was a great factor in my decision to enroll. Though library access through the internet has been an invaluable resource, there is nothing that can ever replace the actual experience of sitting in a quiet library with readily available, relevant resources. The English Library in particular is almost a kind of refuge, with its warm seclusion and the availability of nearly every book and resource one could need for thorough and worthwhile research. I value the easily browsable access I have to material books and journals most. Everything else is of secondary importance to this central concern. I would not support any configuration or plan which involved moving substantial portions of any of these libraries' collections to Oak Street, or another off‐
site storage facility, or even to Main Stacks. Main Stacks is a navigational nightmare. Once a book goes in there, it's almost as good as lost. I most value the environment within the English Library. Much quieter and friendlier than other parts of the library. I also appreciate the copy machine located within the English Library. Overall: the extensive COLLECTIONS especially of newspapers and journals are the most valuable‐‐and maintaining the policies that have yielded those collections is most important to my research and also teaching. So, of course, is book collection and the tie‐in with other library systems. I have worked extensively with both particular libraries named. I find the services of both libraries (librarians) have been very valuable in attending to collection development of books and journals relevant in the field and responding to faculty requests in such matters. I have appreciated the English library's maintaining a reference research collection and 'new acquisitions' shelf and find the room a very pleasant place in which to do research/journal reading (the latter as time allows). Having photocopy services nearby to copy out articles not available on‐line (now or perhaps ever) is also very important. I think the English Library is especially important for graduate teaching. I (and my graduate students) benefit from having materials in one place and staff who are familiar with the holdings. 25 I can study and find books, movies, cds, etc there. Honestly, the most important thing for me is a good study space, which is why I often spend time in the education library. The stacks are very important. Kathleen in the English Library is a treasure: I send my undergrad students to her for help, and I'm distressed to hear she's retiring. I would be very upset if that space was changed: I'd feel insulted and very much less at home in the library. I also deeply appreciate being able to order a book online and get it delivered to my mailbox. That makes the riches of the Illinois book collection very easy to access. What I love about the English Library is twofold: (1) the major critical works on the texts I study are almost always available on the English Library shelves‐‐it's only when I get into the more esoteric aspects of a topic that I have to hit the Main Stacks; (2) I can often do more useful research browsing the stacks in the English Library for 5 minutes than I can when using online indices. Computers are great for pointed, targeted searches, but they stink for the sort of serendipitous free association that generates much of my most creative work. Gutting the English Library's collection by squeezing it (and Modern Languages) into too small a space would effectively cripple my work as a researcher‐‐especially if I ended up having to constantly request the low‐circulation medieval studies works I use from Oak Street once they were relegated to that archive. The SUBJECT LIBRARIANS. I never fail to learn something new from them, often about materials in my own field, which I thought I knew well. I do think the English library is valuable ‐‐ but I can also see a point to having all the 821.9s in one place. As much as I appreciate the departmental libraries, they aren't my top priority. What is my top priority ‐‐ if I haven't already been sufficiently heavy‐handed in stressing this ‐‐ is total, accessible stack space. The personal contact with the librarians. Excellent and knowledgeable staff. helpful and friendly staff direct access to books as it allows to see references we may not be aware of by simply consulting catalogs interconnections online features I value the librarians’ special areas of certification. When we had a German librarian that could answer my questions about German sources, that was incredibly useful. I like knowing that the books I will need are, for the most part, all in one library. The Modern Languages and Linguistics Library suits my needs very well. Informed personnel, able and willing to help. Modern Languages Librarians have been very helpful in providing me with advice and research tips during periods of preliminary research for article and book projects. I think the staff is consistently great. Trained librarians and other staff are absolutely essential! I value the sheer amount of books and the organization of the libraries the most. Librarians that work in my specific area of German. Having a librarian just for 'foreign language' doesn't cut it. That is like having a 'science' librarian who has to cover chemistry, biology and physics. I like the quiet, reader‐friendly atmosphere and accessibility of reference works and important editions. Geology library ‐ location, hours, and amount of resources They are crammed full of useful information. I don't have comments about the English Library or the Modern Languages Library, but I do feel that the Music Library is confusing, and I wish that the puzzle table would return. I appreciate the vast collection of dictionaries available in the Modern Languages Library. The fantastic collections. Space to work, computers, tables, comfortable chairs, online access to materials. Modern Languages (can be) one stop shopping for research, although usually you have to go to both main stacks and modern languages. But more help is available at modern languages. 26 Easy access to field‐specific texts. Knowledgeable librarians Knowledgeable staff, great selection and services Well for the Slavic library I value the people who work there, because they are very knowledgeable, and know about resources that aren't listed in the online catalog. Now I will never do a term paper without talking to them, to make sure that I have found everything that can be useful‐‐it usually turns out that I haven't. Slavic library‐‐great, professional staff and service! I love Paula ‐ she is the best librarian ever! She is super helpful and I love that I can consult with her online, by phone or in person! The modern languages library is very small and has only a few tables. The learning environment and the study atmosphere are some of my primary reasons for going to the library. They are quiet, have electrical outlets, and have internet. How specialized librarians assist with research projects, acquisitions SMS the maintenance of the collections, instructional sessions where students ate trained to conduct library research, facilitating access to libraries, databases, and materials elsewhere (especially outside the us) for me and for my graduate advisees Q17. If the services and collections in the English and Modern Language Libraries were brought together, that would make my research: Q18. If you have any further comments about Library services supporting literatures, languages, linguistics, cinema studies and related disciplines, please note them here. See also the interactive visualizations of these responses on Many Eyes. The current configuration of the library is very good. Don't fix it if it is not broken, please. My field requires that I occasionally visit Ricker, which I always dread. The librarians are wonderful as usual, but the staff is not so hot, and the books are a mess! Over there is where they need some love. A wonderful library and great staff. Thank you! A comment about question 6: I wasn't aware that the main library, the English library, the modern languages and ling library all had separate web presences. My answer to that question isn't that accurate, as a result! The physical layout and services of the library are fine, in my opinion. I have two complaints. 1. Online Reserves take too long to be processed, and they don't answer email inquiries. This makes 27 planning difficult. I gave a book to be put on reserve in the UGX at the beginning of the semester. It took three weeks to process. I emailed several times and never got an answer. In the end, it was wasted effort, because by the time the book was available my assignment using it was finished. 2. Online databases. They are great, but the way they are organized on the website is obscure and takes experience. It makes it daunting for undergrads, when it should be so easy. #11 allowed us to check only one category. For books and monographs (since when is a monograph not a book?), I checked campus mail, but I also wanted to check browse/use in the library. I do and value each a great deal. #17 Consolidation would make things easier, and so I checked easier, but really, it depends. If consolidation also means shrinking, then it would be really disappointing. Thank you! As to the final question, I don't foresee my own research needs being hampered, but I do anticipate problems for students (both graduate and undergraduate). I also worry about the elimination of staff and holdings in such a merger. If shelf space is an issue, maybe it would be a good idea to let faculty hold books longer? At other libraries, faculty can hold borrowed books indefinitely, or until users recall them. Because of i‐share we don't have the option of recall, which is often inconvenient because some i‐share libraries have very short lending periods and no renewal options. My research projects can go on for a long time, and I like to hold onto relevant books for as long as the thought process is germinating. I wind up buying a lot of expensive academic books because the small library that has the copy I can get will only give it to me for a few months. If there was an option to recall the UIUC copy of a book, then you could also extend the maximum time faculty can hold them and you might have an overall reduction of the items requiring shelf space at any given moment. The only thing I'd be concerned about with an English or ML merger would be, whether or not there would still be staff who would be as knowledgeable about resources in my area, or if the current collection in English would diminish significantly, or if there were significant changes in new book purchases and so on. One thing I appreciate about the English library is the new books section, and I often find new books in my field by browsing it, so I'd hate to see that go. Basically, I like what I have, but I'm supportive of anything the library can do to improve access and services. I am in favor of merging English and Modern Languages, but only if in doing so we do not lose either the expertise of the subject‐area librarians in these related, but very different, fields, or access to the current journals, reference works, and basic collections that are currently available in these two libraries. Being able to browse print collections is central to my work and that of my students, as I've said. Though it does not impact me directly, I am also concerned that bringing together English and Modern Languages would adversely impact the number of library staff with area specific skills‐‐such as the languages necessary to proper cataloging‐‐skills that, by my understanding, are already in short supply. I also have not been persuaded that the New Service Models are cost effective: the only way to recover the significant cost of re‐configuration is by cutting library positions, which can only adversely affect services in the long run. Although the collapsing of the English and Modern Language Libraries into one center would not dramatically affect my research per se, the closing of specialized libraries to create more general 'centers' does concern me a great deal. I support the continued funding of these separate libraries that employ specialized librarians and staff, and lament the increasing 'centralization' of power in our library system. The system should be easy to navigate, of course, but it should also allow for specialized departments and informed staff who have trained in these fields. Bigger isn't always better. Last Spring, my students in the survey of American Literature all expressed amazement at how helpful specialized librarians are with developing research projects. This feature of our libraries should be better advertised! Many of my students were juniors who had never thought about consulting librarians before. I think the library often promotes its digital resources too much, displacing the great resources we have in our human staff (although emailing librarians is helpful, too!) 28 I support the consolidation of English and Modern Languages and related disciplines, but only in a space which allows most of their collections to remain intact and physically browsable, as well as offering a decent, convenient workspace, and access to multiple knowledgeable subject specialists. Any solution which involves combination of these varied and vast disciplines under the oversight of only one subject specialist is completely untenable. No one person would really be equipped to manage all of this material, or thoughtfully help patrons and develop collections in all of these areas of study. A combined library with multiple subject specialists and well trained staff (not one single subject specialist and several relatively untrained student workers!) is the only academically responsible plan, in my opinion. E.g., videos should NOT be renewable beyond 1 week for students; staff (expanded for this purpose) should follow up more immediately about 'overdue' and 'missing' videos before they are entirely lost; should establish a permanent reserve system for video titles that appear to have gone 'missing' previously and required replacement and/or which faculty put on reserve for at least one semester a year. The media should rigorously assess the extent of loss under the present policies (not just when reported by a patron seeking the work but through a thorough catalog assessment) and consider what changed policies or practices of enforcement might reduce the kinds of problems to which I point above. I think that perhaps Communications and Cinema Studies materials currently in the English Library might be meaningfully integrated but only if a much larger space IN THE MAIN LIBRARY were found for that‐‐ideally in the MAIN LIBRARY. (CERTAINLY not have the Cinema studies materials moved to the Communications library space, with its very limited hours‐‐but possibly, if the English library is to gain more space to integrate Communications materials into the English library or create a separate and very sizeable space in the Main library for Communications and Cinema Studies materials... More hours for the newspaper library and NO MORE BOOKS in there and QUIETER, please, for researchers working! Thanks. I'm very concerned about the mismatch between the library's cinema collection and our teaching facilities. Many films are on VHS (especially independent films), but our classrooms will soon stripped of VHS players. This is a SERIOUS impediment to our teaching. (This is not necessarily the library's fault, but I would like to see the library insist on more collaboration with the instructional technology folks.) The English library is not a well‐advertised resource. Though I know it exists, I have had to use it only once in my three years here and do not see it as an exceptional place to study. DO NOT GET RID OF THE BOOKS! There are some research experiences that can be helpfully supplemented but not totally replaced by online search. Sometimes I think the library wants to replace everything with electronic data, which I see only as a useful supplement, NOT as a replacement for the physical experience of being in a library and being able to pick up and scan 10 books in 10 minutes. This is one of the biggest research libraries in the country: why not build on our strength rather than hide the books away in a warehouse where you need a forklift to get at them? Relying on online research is also potentially inequitable, since it depends on an expensive home internet connection and printer that many but not all students can access. I want to be able to tell my students that they can go to the English library to find books AS WELL AS relying on online databases. I'm saying the same thing over and over again, but let me stress it just once more: I appreciate the digital humanities, and have done that sort of work myself. I do use electronic texts. But when I do historical research, none of that replaces extensive shelf browsing. I can skim many more volumes in three minutes on a shelf than I can with a browser ‐‐ and I'll find things I wouldn't find on the browser. (I also think this is vital for teaching; in my classes I explicitly tell students to visit the library and browse shelves.) Oak St. was a blow to my research. Please, please, please, do not reduce the total amount of easily accessible stack space in order to make room for computers and offices. cinema studies materials are sometimes tricky to locate because they are spread across several area libraries (mostly in English, but some in MLL...) I have brought back books on a few occasions where I am 100% positive that I have returned them (I 29 keep track) and the system has not properly checked them back in. Please have your employees be more careful in the process because paying for an 'unreturned' book costs a lot of money. It would not be good to merge Modern Languages with English. Students would use Modern Languages more if the environment was better. It is not fair to look at the traffic stats for Modern Language because the library environment is so unconducive to work. If the English and the Modern Langs. Library are combined, I am afraid the Modern Languages will be short‐changed as they are in PMLA, where articles about non‐English literature are clearly treated as 'also‐rans' (second and third place winners). The Modern Languages Library is fantastic!!!!! I feel that the libraries of the University of Illinois are great. I don't think this is the correct place on this questionnaire to put this, but I tried to put it in 12b and was unable to submit my survey because there were too many characters in my answers. I assume this is the offending one. My access to materials in the stacks is hampered by the lack of ability to bring my things into the stacks with me. I appreciate having a place to put my coat, of course. But I simply don't see why purses, books, backpacks, etc. couldn't be checked on the way out. It seems like using a sledge hammer to kill a fly to try to catch users stealing, etc., by preventing all users from carrying in even the minimum of materials they need. Using myself as an example, I use my laptop with a cord to plug it in and a hand‐held mouse. I also use paper and pencils/pens. What purpose does it serve for me to take them all in 'loose' rather than in a case or bag? Carrying in my laptop, cord, mouse, paper (often many sheets with notes) and pencils/pens leaves me without a free hand to press the button for the elevator or turn lights on. It also makes me have to think about making sure to wear garments with pockets into the stacks. This is a particular hardship on women, as many women's clothes do not have pockets. So it's a big hassle, and what purpose does it serve that a student checking bags at the exit wouldn't address. Well, I could go on and on but.... These stacks entrance requirements may not seem like a big deal to everyone using them, but for me they are burdensome and deter me from using the stacks. There must be other people besides me who are equally hampered by these pointless rules. Please note that I have filled out this survey as a scholar and not a librarian. My visits to the libraries is based on my scholarly needs and not my work schedule. Paula Carns Since I don't have any need for either the English Library or Modern Languages Library or their materials, I don't know how useful any of my responses will be. As is clear from my answers to this survey, the one area that I think needs improvement is the management of the DVD collection. Otherwise, I have been very happy with how the English library has managed cinema studies materials. I am a comparatist, so having more areas under one roof MIGHT help me, but that is a big IF. It would not help me if the collapse of the two libraries eroded the ability of the librarians in charge of it to speak to the specifities of each field. Also, if the space chosen becomes a thoroughfare, or is amidst the general library population (as in a general reference room), that would great reduce the usefulness of these libraries as an area‐specific haven for thoughtful contemplation of the tasks at hand. A robust print collection of literary editions and monographs is still the absolute backbone of teaching and research in this area. Merging those two libraries would have no impact on my research. I use the library on‐line. 30