The document explores the future design and utilization of library spaces, emphasizing diverse user needs and changing behaviors across demographic groups. It discusses various methodologies for assessing library space usage and student preferences, highlighting the importance of adaptable and social environments for learning. Challenges related to physical space, technology integration, and community engagement are also examined to inform renovation efforts and improve library functionality.

1. Creating library spaces of the future LaTesha VelezDiversity Resident Librarian

2. PerceptionsThe changing libraryThe Deserted LibraryThe rise of the social libraryThe library as placeDoes the building still matter?Public sphereCommunal modelSocial modelThe new libraryLibrary as a source of “context diversity”(Ibarra, 2001, 2005)

3. BackgroundHow do patrons use academic libraries spatially?Are there differences?Racial/ethnicGenderLearning stylesGenerationalYear in collegeOther

4. ChallengesDefining spacesWhat types of spaces do exist in librariesWhat types of spaces should exist in librariesHidden variablesType of work being doneMajorIndividual backgroundMarital statusCreating spacesMonetary issuesSpace issues

5. Theories on diversityMulti contextualityContext diversityIbarra, Roberto (2005). A Place to Belong: The Library as Prototype for Context Diversity. ACRL Twelfth National Conference.LC (Low Context)HC (High Context)Multicontext usersOblinger, Diana (2003). Boomers, Gen-Xers, & Millenials: Understanding the New Students. EDUCAUSE Review,July/August: 37-47.Millennials

6. MethodsResearch questionsQ1. learning styles and perception of library as spaceQ2. learning styles and use of library as spaceQ3. learning styles and individual differencesQ4. relationship between individual differences and perception and use of library as space

7. MethodsStudy sample/siteUndergraduateD.H. Hill Library, North Carolina State UniversityLearning commonsSpecial Collections Reading RoomSurvey sample size: 100

8. DH Hill Library Learning Commons

9. DH Hill Library Special Collections Reading Room

10. methodsMeasuresPerceptions of the libraryUse of a libraryLearning styles (High contextual vs. Low contextual)Demographics (race, gender, age, etc.)Data collectionSweeps (Observational Study)SurveyAdministered on-site

11. Preliminary FindingsSweepsObserved a lot of females in reading roomTextingIndividual study over groupMulti-taskingFewer African American students in reading roomOnly males

12. Preliminary FindingsSurveySpaces most often used during the semesterQuiet space, 37%Social space, 28%Both types, 35%

13. Preliminary FindingsSurveyFavorite spaceQuiet study space, 45%Social space, 44%

14. Preliminary FindingsSurveyFrequency of useNumber of times visitedAt least 3 to 5 times a week, 62%1 or 2 times a week, 24%A few times a month, 11%

15. Preliminary FindingsSurveyHours spent in library during the previous two weeksMore than five hours a day, 33%3-5 hours, 27%1-2 hours, 24%

16. Preliminary FindingsSurveyDays of the weekWeekday night, 85%Weekday day time, 50%Weekend, 16%

17. Preliminary FindingsSurveyActivitiesMost FrequentDoing assignments (6.0)Group study (5.29)Using computers/lab (5.23)Least FrequentReading for pleasure (2.06)Sleeping (2.23)Playing a game (2.41)

18. Preliminary FindingsSurveyPerceptions of the library designAdaptable spaces (6.34)Flexibility (6.16)Open but clearly defined space (6.08)Technology and tools (6.0)Types of resources academic and leisure (5.96)Furniture (5.78)

19. Michael CrumptonAssistant Dean for Administrative ServicesUniversity of North Carolina at Greensboro

20. Example at UNCG

21. Identifying Space ProblemLibrary consists of 3 story main building built in 1950 and a 9 story book tower131,705 sq ft of space at capacitySeating for 849 reduced by 50% last 5 yearsCollection runs full, incoming acquisitions outpacing withdrawals Student requests are for group study areas with tools for collaborative workQuality of instruction effected by small instructional space

22. Proposed FutureRenovationsCreate a larger instruction labExpand collaboratories and group spacesExpand information commonsExpand service areas to include newsroom, in-house vending, expanded copy centerExpand Archives spaceReduce and relocate Government DocumentsReduce size of Reference collection

23. Purpose of Assessment ActivityGain hard data to present to consultant for programming ideas related to renovationsGain data on how students use the buildingGain data to present to University Administration for funding requestsDetermine students’ satisfaction with the LibrariesConsider changes to technology policies and actions to library spaceDetermine future needs

24. Changes in FunctionalitySuperLab – needed for convenience

25. Wireless – highly used, but need space in which to use

26. Instruction – class and individual, grown significantly but needs more space

27. Food and Drink – keeps students in library to workIncrease in student population – natural facility on campus to feel the increase

28. Increase in higher degree level research needsIn-house SurveyNovember 2007Jackson and Music RecruitmentSet up table in LibraryStaffed with studentsGiveaways600 responses!

29. What they do

30. How often they come

31. When they’re here

32. Alone vs. GroupsGroup floorQuiet Floor

33. Computer usageReference RoomInformation Commons

34. Using MaterialsReference RoomReading Room

35. Role of Library SpaceA Learning EnvironmentTransformational character of intentional learningKnowledge transformationLibrary as facilitator:Environment design – comfort and aesthetics Nurturing relationships – staff and/or peersFoster self-directed learningCreations of “new” knowledgeSafe and non-threatening Bringing together readers and booksCollection buildingSpace for reflecting and contemplation Third place use of spaceInformation ConsultingAccess to information“Gateway “ for locating informationRetrieval and communicationsSocial and technological networks“archive” or preserve resources

36. What’s Happening to Our Space?Electronic vs. printOrganization shiftingReporting structure, trafficUser needs changingRemote use, group activitiesPoliticsOther space demandsTechnologyNew equipment

37. Purposeful Assessment of SpaceSpace as a factor to organization’s missionGathering Services providedPartner in learningThings to considerConsideration of assessment’s purposeTypes of questions to be usedData-gathering methodologiesReporting strategies for results

38. Basic ElementsStatement of purpose with context – addresses unique concerns and significanceLiterature review – multiple issues being addressed out there so a review of relevant activities is goodDetermining assessment objectives – through development of research questions to be answeredEstablishing methodologies and procedures for implementation of assessment activityPresent facts based finding of date w/o biasDiscussion or interpretation of findingsConclusions and next steps

39. Problem StatementNeeds to represent the point of view of stakeholdersNeeds to identify the scope and focus of planning an assessment activityShould contribute history and background information as well as flags for concernsShould put in context what the limitations are or could beMust be conveyed in an open transparent point of view that isn’t seen as defensive

40. Space DesignProgramming – what space will be used forInitial layouts – DDDetailed review of infrastructure – CDProtocolsProfessional standardsCodes, local and multiplePlannersArchitectsInterior designersStakeholdersDonors Administration

41. Space Options or NeedsGroup teaching/learningSimulated/special learning environmentsImmersive environmentsPeer-to-peer and social learningLearning clusterIndividual spacesExternal spaces

42. Doing your researchPrimary(data gathered firsthand)Experimental

43. Pilot projects

44. Surveys

45. Interviews

46. Focus groups

47. Direct observation

48. TestingSecondary(data gathered by others)Secondhand reports

49. Historical data

50. Purchased data

51. Professional publications

52. Benchmarking

53. Best-practices reportsFocus GroupsRecruitmentemails to student groups, posters, flyersincentivesGood mix of undergraduates, graduate students and subject areas, ages, off-campus and on-campusTook notes and transcribedUsed LIS practicum student againPart of discussion was showing space consultant’s first concept drawing

54. Assessment Methods - QuestionnaireDisadvantagesLiteracy and/or language issuesClarification or explanation issues (lack of detail)Responses limited to context of questionPerfunctory answersCan be consider impersonal or coldAdvantagesMost cost effective for quantity of feedbackAnonymous Can be comparedCan be statistically analyzedLess time consumingCan be done simultaneously and in multiple locations

55. Assessment Methods – Interviews (IND)Least time-efficient and usually most costlyInterviewer should be practiced and skilledInterviewee selection must be broad to represent all points of viewShould consider sampling modelsProvides personal communication opportunities:More detailsMore free associationProblems or issues can be explored in depthAllows for examples, anecdotes, stories, illustration of issues

56. Assessment Methods – Focus GroupsRequires prep and skilled facilitatorBe aware of peer pressure responsesRecognize broader stakeholder definition to get all viewpointsUse data from other methods to support proposalsKeep it realistic Teaching toolGroup interaction can procreate broader issuesNon-verbal clues can be usefulMore time-efficient for interacting with more peopleAchieve better overall understanding

57. Other MethodsSandboxing – test concepts prior to large scale commitmentDesign charettes – stakeholders allowed to actually create designOutside experts – seek input from specialized expertiseClose-ended vs. open-ended questions

58. Observational Studies (Sweeps)Checklist of observable behaviorsVarious times of day and eveningMultiple observers involvedEliminates emotional or subjective data

59. Delphi StudyTechnique premise is that experts have the best idea of future pathwaysValidity of study is based on expertise of participantsQuestions/responses are adjusted until participants reach consensus or determined it can’t beNot a precise analytical techniqueIs helpful with problems or issues that aren’t data driven

60. Delphi con’tWilliam J. Mitchell (paraphrased)Spaces that work well (long term) are built around human needs, comfort, natural light, social ambience, connection to outdoorsMust remain sensitive to how technology and culture come togetherChange statementsWhy or why notImpact and desireAgreeing on consensusResults rankedCauses of non-consensus Economics and technology can be changing factors

61. Data Driven MethodologyRemoves politicsReduces emotional investmentMakes adversarial moves more rationalTakes problem out of personal context and allows for subjective analysis

62. Factors to ConsiderDesign FactorsSpace FactorsWhat question are you asking and whyWhat goals and objectives are already determinedWho is the audienceWhat other information is available or neededWhat is best methodTypes of stakeholdersInfrastructure issuesLocation and adjacencies Functionality FlexibilityNon-public needsEfficiency of designFunding ability

63. Questions AskedHow often they come and when?Entrance they use?What do they do?What’s good, what needs improvement?Role of the Library?Concept drawingIndentify major changes for feedbackEsthetics of specific areas, i.e. circ desk, basement, SuperLab

64. Concept Drawings

65. Student FeedbackLibrary is an important place to studyBoth group space and quiet space importantMost students use their own materialsDon’t want to carry their laptops aroundA variety of furniture and spaces are neededNot getting instruction at freshman levelOnline resources particularly important to grad student

66. Summarized ResponsesCirc Desk not easily assessableSuperlab is needed but as convenience, would go further to useFood and drink important for using libraryLove collaboratories… Need more!Librarians helpful but group instruction suffers from lack of spaceBasement creepy and dark

67. Other Useful InfoLack of awareness of some servicesSoftware on Library computersPrinting optionsCopy center type servicesCarrels and lockersIM assistanceMaterials not as important to undergradsTwo entrances create traffic flow and communication opportunityStudents expect us to be there

68. Effect on Space PlanningFeedback and ideas carried into second concept drawing and final reportEvidence of library more important for space rather than materialsComforts and conveniences important for ownership of spaceLibrary can be host to other service points with expectations of complianceLibrary is important to total educational experience and should be presented as such

69. Immediate Actions TakenExpand collaboratories conceptIncrease popular furniture optionsWill offer laptop checkout in Fall 2008Offering carrels to all studentsAdding vending optionsExpanding 24/5 available spaceWill target marketing of IM, collaboratories and other servicesImplement NewsRoom in the FallAdd Messaging Board for traffic

70. Space Assessment ReportReposition Circulation DeskExpanded Information Commons area including computers and collaboratoriesMoved Superlab to 2nd floor – destinationDevelop Cyber-café conceptCreate Government Information and Data CenterBasement remodel to include “people friendly” spacesDeveloped “Main Street” of services concept

71. Summary of ProcessSpace needs and problems identifiedSpace consultant hiredSurvey of student space needs conductedObservation studies of behavioral related traits conductedFocus group activity conducted with space consultant’s first concept drawingSpace consultant’s revised second drawing compared to assessment data

72. Summary of Process “continued”Staff feedback gathered from each concept presentation including assessment dataSpace consultant issued final report and recommendationsChanges identified that were affordable outside of remodel executed summer ’08Proposal presented to Dean’s Council with request for funding assistance for major work and changesAssessment data summarized for staff

73. PUBLIC LIBRARY FACILITIES DESIGN CONSIDERATIONSOffered By Philip CherryOnslow County Public Library Director

74. PARADIGM SHIFT IN SPACE PLANNINGOld methods of calculating space or square footage are mostly no longer applicable.Ideals such as “one branch every five miles or every fifteen minutes” may now be unsustainable.Old measurements of the library’s information “fire power” have also gone by the wayside.

75. PARADIGM SHIFT IN SPACE PLANNING Sq. ft. per capita ratios no longer provide accurate internal guidance or desired political pressure. Example of old calculation: Ratio: 1 sq. ft. per capita Population: 250,000 Library Space: 250,000 sq. ft. This type of measurement as a rationale for construction has lost its power with political leaders because of economics.

76. PARADIGM SHIFT IN SPACE PLANNING Similarly space allocations that emphasize total holding capacity of physical items no longer deserve to be the central concern of interior space planning. There is now more information delivery power in a well designed, Internet enabled 50,000 volume facility of today than there was in a 1 million volume facility of circa 1990!

77. PARADIGM SHIFT IN SPACE PLANNING Newer “sexy” ratios that emerged in the last decade or so created noble end goals for many communities; but ultimately proved to be sustainable in only the best economic/budgetary conditions. An example of this is the “five mile-fifteen minute” relationship between library facilities within a community.

78. PARADIGM SHIFT IN SPACE PLANNING Many Library Systems that expanded aggressively using variations of distance/drive time considerations were forced to significantly scale back operations when funding was substantially reduced. Indianapolis-Marion County Public Library Charlotte Public Library DC Public Library System

79. PARADIGM SHIFT IN SPACE PLANNING Collection size ratios and the gross measures they are based on may still inform some through annual statistical report instruments; but really do not hold the place they once held in facilities designed discussions.

80. PARADIGM SHIFT IN SPACE PLANNING The approaches and discussions I find still useful/relevant to public facility design discussions center on user behaviors; desired programming features (still based on user behaviors); building code requirements and sustainability.

81. USER BEHAVIORSUnlike school, academic and special libraries, public libraries accommodate extremely open populations.These diverse populations bring behaviors and expectations that must be taken into account during the public library design process.Failure to account for these behaviors and expectations can haunt a project for the rest of its existence.

82. USER BEHAVIORSChildren & family focused activities such as storytime and family film Fridays.Computer workstation/Internet access is a universal public library patron expectation.Library as center of community life and activity will manifest itself in features such as multiple meeting rooms and service as for example polling place, town square, business center, homework center and safe house.

83. USER BEHAVIORSUndesirable user behaviors include things such as:Attempted drug dealingProstitutionChild predationVagrancy LoiteringTheftPanhandling

84. USER BEHAVIORSAs is the case for many academic and community college library patrons, more public library patrons expect the entire property to function as “the library” rather than just the physical building.Disparate user behaviors can create instant conflict between patrons (children/older readers/Internet adults)

85. BEHAVIORS INTO FACILITY FEATURESLarge community room capable of being divided into smaller spaces using partition system. Ideal minimum capacity 100 seats.Kitchens or kitchenettes support meeting room.Small group (under 15 people) conference rooms in addition to large community room.Children’s & Youth areas intentionally placed away from main reading room & Adult stacks areas. (Do Not Place Storytime Room Next to Local History & Genealogy Room Unless War is a Desired Outcome!)

86. BEHAVIORS INTO FACILITY FEATURESDesign that takes advantage of and or creates beautiful exterior views (includes plenty of window space.Wi-Fi technology that washes over the library property-not just the interior space.Meeting space designed as its own clustering allowing it to be used independently of the rest of the library.

87. BEHAVIORS INTO FACILITY FEATURESWell placed and secured power outlets for public use.Hard-wired as well as Wi-Fi NetworkAttractive carpet tiles whose patterns effectively hide dirt (and age of the carpet)Avoidance of high end/high art furniture that may look great but functions horribly under heavy use.

88. BEHAVIORS INTO FACILITY FEATURES (SECURITY)Choice of exterior plantings that provide very open area in and around entrances and exitsAvoidance of designs that create blind hallways, nooks and crannies where unacceptable behavior can occurSerpentine or dual entrance bathroom foyers rather than traditional men/women doors

89. BEHAVIORS INTO FACILITY FEATURES (SECURITY)Full alarm systems that feature door contacts, glass-breaks, and zoned motion detection. Smoke/fire alarms/sprinkler requirements often driven by building codes.Single point general entry entrance/egress into children’s roomControlled single point exit from youth room to exterior reading/seating garden

90. BEHAVIORS INTO FACILITY FEATURES (SECURITY)Parking lot design that calms speedingFront door entrance/exit that does not give the patron an opportunity to step directly into traffic flowElimination of architectural features that may make the architect proud but which create immediate safety risk such as two story foyers with low upper story railings.

91. BEHAVIORS INTO FACILITY FEATURES (SUSTAINABILITY)Use of sustainability concepts such as those contained in the LEED programAvoidance of architectural details that will be expensive to replace/maintain or difficult to access for serviceDesign which will allow function of facility with a less-than-ideal staff compliment

92. BEHAVIORS INTO FACILITY FEATURES (SPECIAL USES)Joint use facilities (public library/school library or public library/community college library)Co-located facilities (library/museum, library/science center, library/environmental education centerSpecial functions contained within a library program (exceptional learning center/ job center, etc.)

93. BEHAVIORS INTO FACILITY FEATURES (SPECIAL USES)Library as emergency operations center (EOC) siteLibrary facility as emergency shelterLibrary as community recovery center

94. What to Read?Planning for Health Science Library Facilities, Weise & Tooey, Administration and Management in Health Science Libraries, vol. 8, 2000Space Assessment as a Venue for Defining the Academic Library, Nitecki, The Library Quarterly, Vol. 81, no. 1, Jan 2011Library as Place: results of a Delphi Study, Ludwig, & Starr, J Med LibrAssoc 93(3) July 2005The Third Place: The Library as Collaborative and Community Space in a Time of Fiscal Restraint, Montgomery & Miller, College & Undergraduate Libraries, 18:228-238, 2011

95. What to Read?Foster, N., & Gibbons, S., Ed. (2007). Studying Students: The Undergraduate Research Project at the University of Rochester. Chicago, IL: Association of College and Research Libraries.Gayton, J.T. (2008). Academic libraries: “Social” or “Communal?” The nature and future of academic libraries. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 34 (1), 60-66.Given, Lisa M. & Leckie, Gloria J. (2003). ‘‘Sweeping’’ the Library: Mapping the social activity space of the public library. Library & Information Science Research, 25, 365–385

96. What to Read?Ibarra, Roberto (2005). A Place to Belong: The Library as Prototype for Context Diversity. ACRL Twelfth National Conference.Oblinger, Diana (2003). Boomers, Gen-Xers, & Millenials: Understanding the New Students. EDUCAUSE Review,July/August: 37-47.Shill, H., & Tonner, S. (2003). Creating a Better Place: Physical Improvements in Academic Libraries, 1995-2002. College & Research Libraries, 64(6), pp. 431-466. Shill, H., & Tonner, S. (2004). Does the Building Still Matter? Usage Patterns in New, Expanded, and Renovated Libraries, 1995-2002. College & Research Libraries, 65(2), pp. 123-150.