This report looks at how staff at eight academic institutions gained new insight about how students and faculty use their libraries, and how the staff are using these findings to improve library technologies, space, and services. Participatory design is a relatively recent approach to understanding library user behavior. It is based on techniques used in anthropological and ethnographic observation. The report is based on a series of presentations at the second CLIR Seminar on Participatory Design of Academic Libraries, held at the University of Rochester’s River Campus June 5-7, 2013. Chapters focus on projects at the University of Colorado, Boulder; Colby College; University of Connecticut; Columbia University; Rush University Medical Center; Purdue University; Northwestern University; and the University of Rochester. David Lindahl, of the University of Missouri-Kansas City, provided the keynote.

Sponsored by the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) and conducted by Ithaka S+R, this study provides insight into how ARL libraries are managing and funding the hundreds of digitized special collections they have created and that they believe to be critical to their futures. This is the first survey of ARL institutions that specifically attempts to understand and benchmark the activities and costs of supporting these collections after they are created. By looking at questions of management, costs, funding sources, impact, and outreach, the survey offers data that will deliver insight to all those engaged in sustaining digitized special collections.

The essay discusses specific concerns of digital humanists in hopes of bridging the gap between how library directors and digital humanities researchers think. It suggests many ways to respond to the needs of digital humanists, and creating a Digital Humanities center is appropriate in relatively few circumstances. The essay recommends that a “Digital Humanities-friendly” environment may be more effective than a Digital Humanities Center but that library culture may need to evolve in order for librarians to be seen as effective Digital Humanities partners. The authors conclude that what we call “The Digital Humanities” today will soon be considered “The Humanities.” Supporting Digital Humanities scholarship is not much different than supporting digital scholarship in any discipline. Increasingly, digital scholarship is simply scholarship.

The essay discusses specific concerns of digital humanists in hopes of bridging the gap between how library directors and digital humanities researchers think. It suggests many ways to respond to the needs of digital humanists, and creating a Digital Humanities center is appropriate in relatively few circumstances. The essay recommends that a “Digital Humanities-friendly” environment may be more effective than a Digital Humanities Center but that library culture may need to evolve in order for librarians to be seen as effective Digital Humanities partners. The authors conclude that what we call “The Digital Humanities” today will soon be considered “The Humanities.” Supporting Digital Humanities scholarship is not much different than supporting digital scholarship in any discipline. Increasingly, digital scholarship is simply scholarship.

The System Development Life Cycle (SDLC) process applies to information system development projects ensuring that all functional and user requirements are met by using a structured and standardized process during all phases of a system’s life cycle. Systems developed according to information technology (IT) best practices are more likely to provide secure and reliable long‐term performance. The Office of the Inspector General (OIG) engaged CliftonLarsonAllen’s (CLA’s) to perform an audit of the Library’s SDLC process to assess the maturity of the Library’s current policies and practices and to evaluate the efficiency of Information Technology Services’ (ITS) process for structuring, planning, and controlling the development of the Library’s vital information systems. This included an assessment of ITS’ compliance with the Library’s SDLC policy and the application of generally accepted IT best practices. In its report, CLA identified several weaknesses in the Library’s SDLC process that places the Library at risk of developing IT systems that are not adequately documented and lack cost and performance data needed to properly monitor and make prudent IT investment decisions. By optimizing its current SDLC process, the Library can mitigate these risks while improving efficiency and governance of IT system development.

The OCLC Research Library Partnership Web Archiving Metadata Working Group was formed to recommend descriptive metadata best practices for archived web content that would meet end-user needs, enhance discovery and improve metadata consistency. This report is a literature review of user needs related to descriptive metadata for web archiving.