NATIONAL CENTER FOR EDUCATION STATISTICS

 Survey Report May 2001

The Status of 

Academic Libraries 

in the United States

Results from the

1996 Academic Library Survey with 

Historical Comparisons

U.S Department of Education

Office of Educational Research and Improvement NCES 2001-301
NATIONAL CENTER FOR EDUCATION STATISTICS

Survey Report May 2001 

The Status of 

Academic Libraries 

in the United States

Results from the

1996 Academic Library Survey with 

Historical Comparisons

Maggie Cahalan

Wendy Mansfield

Natalie Justh

Mathematica Policy Research, Inc.

Jeffrey W. Williams, Project Officer

National Center for Education Statistics

U.S Department of Education

Office of Educational Research and Improvement NCES 2001-301
i

Acknowledgments

The collection and publication of the academic library data has been a team effort. It would not have 

been accomplished without the support and effort of a number of individuals and organizations. First 

we would like to thank the academic librarians who provided the information upon which the Survey 

Report is based and the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) Library

Coordinators who submitted the data to the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). The 

survey was coordinated by Jeffrey Williams, the NCES project officer. The data were collected and 

processed by the U.S. Bureau of Census Government Division. The American Library Association 

(ALA) Office of Research and Statistics and the IPEDS Library Project Advisory Committee were 

instrumental in designing the survey and shaping the content of what is presented in the report.

Members of the IPEDS Library Project Advisory Committee during the time of the study were: Julia 

Blixrud, Association of Research Libraries; Jan H. Kemp, Texas Tech University; Paul DuMont, 

Dallas County Community College District; Ron Naylor, University of Miami Libraries; Carolyn 

Norman, California Community Colleges; Leland M. Park, Davidson College; Keith Lance, 

Colorado State Library; Hugh Thompson, ALA. 

Helpful review was provided by a number of individuals. Leslie Scott of ESSI served as Technical 

Reviewer. NCES reviewers were Frank Morgan and Bernie Greene. Bruce Taylor adjudicated the 

report. External reviewers were Allen Cissell, Office of the Community College Liaison, Department 

of Education; Leland Park, Library Director Dickenson College; Mary Jo Lynch, American Library 

Association; and Martha Kyrillidou, Association of Research Libraries.
ii

 
iii

Highlights

Services

ß In 1996, 3,408 of the 3,792 postsecondary degree-granting institutions in the United States 

reported that they had their own academic library. 

ß Just over one-fourth (28 percent) of the academic libraries in postsecondary degree-granting 

education institutions have branch libraries, and among those with branches, the mean number of 

branches was 2.7 (table 1). Branch libraries are auxiliary library service outlets with quarters 

separate from the central library that houses the basic collection. 

ß The rapid development of electronic and Internet library services continues. In 1996, over 90 

percent of institutions had electronic indexes (such as citation or topical indexes) and reference 

tools (such as Statistical Abstracts), and 81 percent had Internet access from within the library 

(table 2).

ß Eighty percent of academic libraries provided access to electronic catalogs that included the 

library's holdings from within the library, and 59 percent provided access to the electronic catalog 

for clientele off-campus (table 2).

ß In fiscal year (FY) 1996, general collection circulation transactions in the nation’s academic 

libraries at postsecondary degree-granting institutions totaled 186.5 million, and reserve collection 

circulation transactions totaled 44.9 million (table 4). General circulation includes library materials, 

such as books, videos, and records taken out or charged out by patrons. General circulation also 

includes renewal of charged library materials. Reserve materials include those that have been 

removed from circulation and set aside so they will be available for a certain academic course or 

activity offered by the institution. 

ß In 1996, 18.5 general circulation transactions were conducted per full-time equivalent (FTE) 

student (enrolled across all institutions with an academic library). The number of general circulation 

transactions varied widely by type of institution attended, ranging from 8.1 transactions per FTE 

student at 2-year Associate of Arts institutions to 35.5 transactions per FTE student attending 

specialized institutions such as military or law schools (table 5). 

ß Interlibrary loans are the number of transactions related to filling requests for materials from other 

libraries. In 1996, academic libraries provided a total of 9.4 million interlibrary loans to other 

libraries (both academic and other types of libraries) and received 7.5 million loans (table 4). With 

the advent of more electronic searching and shared catalogs, interlibrary loans have increased in 

recent years. For example, interlibrary loans received by academic libraries increased by 64 

percent over the period between 1990 and 1996 (table 4).
iv

ß In 1996, on average, academic library physical facilities were open about 76 hours per week. The 

largest percentage of academic libraries (44 percent) reported providing 60-79 hours of service 

per typical week. Forty percent, however, provided 80 or more public service hours per typical 

week (figure 4). 

ß In 1996, there were about 1.6 visits per week to the library per full-time-equivalent (FTE) student 

based on a gate count of 16.5 million visitors per typical week (table 4). A gate count is the 

number of persons who physically enter library facilities (a person can be counted more than 

once).

Collections

ß Taken together, the nation’s 3,408 academic libraries at postsecondary degree-granting institutions 

held a total of 806.7 million volumes of books, bound serials, and government documents. 

Excluding duplicate titles within a library's collection, there were 449.2 million titles at the end of 

FY 1996 (table 6).

ß Of the total volumes, almost half (45 percent or 352.1 million) were held at the 125 institutions 

categorized under the 1994 Carnegie Classification as Research institutions (table 8 and figure 8). 

Research institutions have about 23 percent of FTE students. In contrast 6 percent of volumes 

were at 2- year Associate of Arts degree-granting institutions, which have 30 percent of FTE 

students (figure 8).

ß Descriptively speaking, over the years since 1974, the number of volumes held in academic 

libraries per FTE student increased. In 1974 there were 57 volumes held per FTE student and in 

1996 there were 81 volumes per FTE student (table 7). The number of volumes held per FTE 

student varied widely among different types of institutions, ranging from 17 volumes per FTE 

student in public 2-year Associate of Arts degree-granting institutions to 268 volumes per FTE 

student in private Research I and II institutions (table 8). 

ß The number of volumes added to library collections per FTE student declined from 3.0 in 1974 to 

a low of 1.9 in 1990. In 1996, the number of volumes added per FTE student was 2.1 (table 7 

and figure 7). 

Staff 

ß A total of 95,580 FTE staff worked in academic libraries in 1996. Of the total, just under onethird (27,268 or 29 percent) were librarians or other professional staff (appendix table B-8). This 

group included staff members doing work that required professional education (the master's degree 

or equivalent) in the theoretical and scientific aspects of librarianship. Professional staff also 
v

included staff not trained as professional librarians, who have equivalent education and training in 

related fields.

ß Student assistants, employed on a temporary basis, were 29 percent of total academic library staff. 

The largest percent of academic library staff were classified as other paid staff, comprising 42 

percent of all academic library staff. Other paid staff includes all staff not categorized as library 

professional staff or student assistants (appendix table B-8 and figure 10).

ß Based on counts of higher education staff collected since 1976, it appears that library staff growth 

has not kept pace with that experienced among the total postsecondary education staff. Overall, 

since 1976, total library FTE staff has increased by 18 percent, while the total FTE staff in 

postsecondary degree-granting institutions has increased by about 38 percent (figure 11). The total 

number of library staff, including student assistants, declined by about 1.3 percent from 1990 to 

1996 (table 10). 

ß In 1996, there were 9.6 FTE total library staff (including student assistants) per 1,000 FTE 

students (table 10). The institutional median number of library staff per 1,000 was similar (8.7 

FTE) (table 10). Excluding student assistants, the median was 5.8 FTE library staff per 1,000 

students (appendix table B-13c). 

Expenditures

ß In 1996, operating expenditures for libraries at the 3,408 postsecondary degree-granting 

institutions totaled $4.30 billion (table 11). Half the total expenditures went to salaries and wages.

ß Just over one-third (35 percent) of expenditures went to information resources related to the 

library collection. This category includes expenditures for books and other printed materials (e.g., 

cartographic materials), current serials, microforms, audiovisual materials, computer files and 

search services, document delivery and interlibrary loan, and other collection expenditures. An 

additional 16 percent of expenditures were for furniture and equipment (e.g., book shelving, 

security equipment), computer hardware and software, bibliographic utilities (e.g., On-Line 

Catalog Library Corporation (OCLC); Social Science Abstracts), and preservation costs (figure 

12).

ß Among information resources expenditures, the largest category of expenditures was current serial 

subscriptions, accounting for fully half of the information resources-related expenditures (figure 13). 

ß Academic library expenditures per FTE student in constant 1996 dollars were $445 in 1974 and 

$431 in 1996. Low points in expenditures per FTE student were reached in 1981 ($372) and 

1990 ($392). Between 1990 and 1996 expenditures per FTE student increased by about 4 

percent in constant dollars (table 12 and figure 14).
vi

ß Considering academic library expenditures as a part of an institution's total Education and General 

(E&G) expenditures for a given year, there seems to be a small steady decline in the percentage of 

total E&G spent on libraries over the period since 1974. The percentage of E&G expenditures for 

academic libraries was 3.9 percent in 1974 and 2.8 percent in 1996 (figure 15).
vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 Page

Acknowledgments.............................................................................................................................i

Highlights.........................................................................................................................................iii

The Status of Academic Libraries, 1996...........................................................................................1 

Introduction.........................................................................................................................1 

Topics Covered in the Report...................................................................................1 

Definitions of Key Terms Used in the Report ............................................................2 

Coverage and Response...........................................................................................6 

Classifications Used in the Report.............................................................................7 

Methodological Caution...........................................................................................7 

Number and Diversity of Academic Libraries........................................................................9 

Historical Growth...................................................................................................10 

Branch Libraries.....................................................................................................10 

Academic Library Services.................................................................................................11 

Electronic Services.................................................................................................11 

Circulation, Library Loans, Reference Transactions, Hours of Service, and 

Presentations....................................................................................................17 

Items Borrowed (Circulation).................................................................................17 

Interlibrary Loans...................................................................................................19 

Reference Transactions ..........................................................................................20 

Visits to the Library (Gate Count)...........................................................................20 

Public Service Hours..............................................................................................21 

Academic Library Collections.............................................................................................23 

Library Collection Summary...................................................................................24 

Change in Volumes Held and Added......................................................................25 

Change Since 1990 in Volumes Held......................................................................28 

Distribution of Volumes of Books and Bound Serials by Type of Institution..............30 

Differences in Volumes per FTE Student.................................................................31 

Number of Volumes per Institution and Academic Library Standards......................31 
viii

Academic Library Staff......................................................................................................33 

Distribution of Full-Time-Equivalent (FTE) Library Staff by Type............................34 

Full-Time-Equivalent (FTE) Staff per 1,000 FTE Students......................................34 

Change in Staff Over Time Since 1974...................................................................36 

Changes in Library Staff Relative to Total Institution Staff and Students...................37 

Academic Library Expenditures..........................................................................................39

Distribution of Library Operating Expenditures........................................................41 

Distribution of Information Resources Expenditures.................................................41 

Change in Total Operating Expenditures and Operating Expenditures Per

Full-Time-Equivalent (FTE) Student .................................................................42 

Academic Library Operating Expenditures as a Percentage of Total Education and 

General (E&G) Expenditures............................................................................45 

Summary/Conclusion..............................................................................................48

References.......................................................................................................................R-1 

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix

A Methodology ...................................................................................................A-1 

B Detailed Tables................................................................................................B-1 

C Academic Library Indicators............................................................................C-1 

D Survey Questionnaire (Including Instructions and Definitions).............................D-1 
ix 

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

1 Number of libraries, number with branch libraries and mean number of branches among 

academic libraries having a branch by institutional characteristics: fall 1996...............10 

2 Percentage of institutions offering various electronic services by type of access: 

1996......................................................................................................................13 

3 Percentage of institutions with selected electronic services, by institution control, size,

and Carnegie Classification: fiscal year (FY) 1996...................................................16 

4 Total number of services provided and number per full-time-equivalent (FTE) student 

by type of service: fiscal year 1996 and percent change from 1990.........................17 

5 General circulation per full-time-equivalent (FTE) student by Carnegie Classification: 

1996......................................................................................................................18 

6 Total number of library materials held and added per full-time-equivalent (FTE) student: 

fiscal year (FY) 1996.............................................................................................24 

7 Number of books and bound serial volumes held and added per full-time equivalent 

(FTE) student, and number of serial subscriptions held: 1974-

1996......................................................................................................................27 

8 Number of books and bound serial volumes held at end of fiscal year 1996, volumes 

held per full-time-equivalent (FTE) student,and percent change since 1990, by Carnegie 

Classification..........................................................................................................29

9 Number of books and bound serial volumes per institution and percentage distribution 

of volumes held by institution control, size, and Carnegie Classification: fiscal year (FY) 

1996......................................................................................................................32 

10 Total academic library staff in 1996, number of staff per 1,000 full-time-equivalent 

(FTE) students in 1996, and percent change between 1990 and 1996 by control and 

Carnegie Classification...........................................................................................35 

11 Total operating expenditures for academic libraries in 1996, amount of expenditures per 

full-time-equivalent (FTE) student in 1996, and percentage distribution of expenditures 

in 1990 and 1996 by type of expenditures..............................................................40 
LIST OF TABLES

(CONTINUED)

Table Page

x 

12 Total and per full-time-equivalent (FTE) student academic library operating 

expenditures, and percent change between 1990 and 1996 in constant dollars by 

control and Carnegie Classification.........................................................................43 

13 Academic library operating expenditures as a percentage of total Education and 

General (E&G) expenditures; and percent change between 1990 and 1996, by control 

and Carnegie Classification.....................................................................................47

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page

1 Distribution of academic libraries by Carnegie Classification of institutions: fall 1996....9 

2 Percentage of academic libraries having selected types of electronic services available 

from within library and elsewhere on campus: fall 1996............................................14 

3 Mean ratio of items loaned to items received through interlibrary loans by Carnegie 

Classification: 1996................................................................................................20 

4 Percentage distribution of academic libraries by public service hours per week

and mean public service hours per week by Carnegie Classification: 1996 ...............21 

5 Total number of books and bound serial volumes held in academic libraries: 1974 to 

1996 (volumes in thousands)..................................................................................25 

6 Number of volumes of books and bound serial volumes held per full-time-equivalent 

(FTE) student: 1974-1996 .....................................................................................26 

7 Total number of books and bound serial volumes added per year in academic libraries 

per full-time-equivalent (FTE) student: 1974-1996..................................................28 

8 Percentage distribution of volumes of books and bound serials held at the end of the 

year and distribution of full-time-equivalent (FTE) student enrollment by Carnegie 

Classification: 1996................................................................................................30 
LIST OF FIGURES

(CONTINUED)

Figure Page

xi

9 Percentage distribution of academic library full-time-equivalent (FTE) staff 

by type of staff: 1996 .............................................................................................33 

10 Number of academic library full-time-equivalent (FTE) staff: 1974-1996.................36 

11 Percent change in full-time-equivalent (FTE) academic library staff and 

postsecondary degree-granting institution FTE students and staff:

1976-1995/96.......................................................................................................38

12 Percent distribution of academic library operating expenditures by

expenditure type and institution level: 1974 and 1996..............................................39

13 Distribution of academic library expenditures for information resources: 1996 ..........42 

14 Academic library operating expenditures per full-time-equivalent (FTE) 

student in constant (1996) dollars: 1974-1996........................................................44 

15 Academic library operating expenditures as a percentage of total Education

and General (E&G) expenditures: 1974-1996.........................................................46

LIST OF APPENDIX TABLES

Appendix A tables

A-1 Number and percent of responding academic libraries by item and by level and control of institution: 

1996 

A-2 Number and percent of non-responding academic libraries by state, level and control of institution: 

1996 

A-3 Total number of academic libraries by state, level, and control of institution: 1996
xii

Appendix A tables (continued)

A-4 Full-time-equivalent (FTE) enrollment and Education and General (E&G) expenditures in

postsecondary degree-granting institutions having academic libraries, by control of institution and 

Carnegie Classification: 50 states and District of Columbia, 1990 and 1996

Appendix B tables

B-1 Total circulation and interlibrary loan transactions in academic libraries by control, level, size, and 

Carnegie Classification of institution: 1996

B-2 Public service hours per typical week and number of libraries by category of public service hours 

per typical week in academic libraries by control, level, size, and Carnegie Classification of 

institution: 1996

B-3 Gate count and number of reference transactions per typical week, and total information service to 

groups, in academic libraries by control, level, size, and Carnegie Classification of institution: 1996

B-4 Number of volumes of books, bound serials, and bound government documents held at the end of 

the year, and number of libraries by number of volumes by control, level, size, and Carnegie 

Classification of institution: 1996

B-5 Number of units and linear feet held at the end of the year and number of volumes, units, and linear 

feet added during the year by material collection category, in academic libraries by control, level, 

size, and Carnegie Classification of institution: 1996

B-6 Number of unduplicated titles held at the end of the year in academic libraries by material collection 

category, by control, level, size, and Carnegie Classification of institution: 1996

B-7 Number of unduplicated titles added during the year by material collection category, and by control, 

level, size, and Carnegie Classification of institution: 1996

B-8 Number and percentage of FTE staff in academic libraries by staff category and by control, level, 

size, and Carnegie Classification: 1996
xiii

Appendix B tables (continued)

B-9 Total operating expenditures and number of libraries by category of total operating expenditures, by 

control, level, size, and Carnegie Classification of institution: 1996

B-10 Library operating expenditures by object of expenditure, and salaries as a percentage of total 

operating expenditures, by control, level, size, and Carnegie Classification of institution: 1996

B-11 Operating expenditures for information resources, equipment, and other selected categories of 

expenditures, by control, level, size, and Carnegie Classification of institution: 1996

B-12 Percentage of responding institutions with selected electronic services, by control, level, size, and 

Carnegie Classification of institution: 1996

B-13a Academic library circulation per full-time-equivalent (FTE) enrollment, by level and control of 

institution, United States: 1996

B-13b Number of books and bound serials volumes held at the end of the year, and added during the 

year by academic libraries per full-time-equivalent (FTE) student, by level and control of 

institution, United States: 1996

B-13c Total academic library staff, except student assistants, per 1,000 full-time-equivalent (FTE) 

students, by level and control of institution, United States: 1996

B-13d Total operating expenditures for academic libraries, information resources, and serials expenditures 

per full-time-equivalent (FTE) student, by level and control of institution, United States: 1996 

B-13e Academic library expenditures as a percentage of Education and General (E&G) expenditures; and 

expenditures for information resources, current serials, and salaries and wages as a percentage of 

total library operating expenditures, by level and control of institution, United States: 1996
xiv
1

The Status of Academic Libraries, 1996

Introduction

Two of the national education goals for the year 2000 emphasize the important roles 

played by resources and staff efforts of academic libraries. The nation’s fourth 

education goal, which is concerned with the ongoing need for access to learning 

resources for teachers and faculty members, and the nation’s sixth education goal, 

which speaks of lifelong learning, both stress the importance of maintaining and 

improving the nation’s academic libraries (National Education Goals Panel, 1994). 

This report presents a description of the status of academic libraries in 1996, a time of 

rapid technology-related change and increased introduction of electronic services 

(Lynch, 1996).

The report presents detailed tabulations for 1996 and historical comparisons with 

previous years, with a focus on comparisons since 1990. In 1996, the Academic 

Library Survey (ALS) was a part of the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data 

System (IPEDS) of the United States Department of Education’s National Center for 

Education Statistics (NCES).

IPEDS is the U.S. Department of Education’s vehicle for collecting data from all 

postsecondary institutions in the United States. Other surveys included within IPEDS 

are Institutional Characteristics, Fall Enrollment, Completions, Finance, Faculty

Salaries, and Fall Staff. The data in this report come from the postsecondary degreegranting institutions in the United States.

Topics Covered in the Report 

Consistent with previous Academic Library reports from the 1990s (Williams, 1993; 

Rossi and Daughtery, 1997; Cahalan and Justh, 1998), this report focuses on several 

key library indicators. These indicators, however, have been expanded over previous 

reports in order to reflect increased attention to library electronic services. Many of 

the indicators chosen for the report encompass those developed by the Association of 

Research Libraries (ARL). This group has developed a series of 30 benchmark 

indicators (Association of Research Libraries Indicators—see appendix C for a listing 

of the indicators). Many of the ratios forming the indicators (e.g., volumes per student 

or total expenditures per student) can be developed from information collected in the 

ALS, and we have included several of them in this report. In addition, we report on 

several other data items included in the ALS questionnaire. 
2

Definitions of Key Terms Used in the Report

We list below some key concepts, referred to in this document, with brief definitions. 

 

Library Definitions

ß An Academic library is defined as an entity in a postsecondary institution 

that provides all of the following:

ß organized collection of printed or other materials, or a combination 

thereof;

ß a staff trained to provide and interpret such materials as required to 

meet the informational, cultural, recreational, or educational needs of 

clientele;

ß an established schedule in which services of the staff are available to 

clientele; and

ß the physical facilities necessary to support such a collection, staff, and 

schedule. This definition includes libraries that are part of learning 

resource centers. 

ß Branch libraries are auxiliary library service outlets with quarters

separate from the central library that houses the basic collection. The 

central library administers the branches. Libraries on branch campuses 

that have separate NCES identification numbers are reported as separate 

libraries.

Library Services

ß Electronic services include Internet access, reference services by e-mail, 

full-texts of periodicals and academic course reserve materials available 

electronically, and electronic library indexes (such as citation indexes).

ß General and reserve circulation. General circulation includes initial 

charging out of items, either manually or electronically, by patrons. The 

count also includes renewals of items, each of which is a circulation 

transaction. Reserve materials include those items that have been removed 

from circulation and set aside so they could be available for a certain 

course or activity.
3

ß Interlibrary loan transactions are the number of filled requests for 

materials provided to other libraries or received by the library from 

another library. This includes both originals and copies and materials sent 

by electronic submission. 

ß Reference transactions(including computer searches) are information 

contacts that involve the knowledge, use recommendation, interpretation, 

or instruction in the use of one or more information sources by a member 

of the library staff. Information sources may include printed (e.g., book 

volumes) and non-printed materials (e.g., microforms) and machinereadable databases (e.g., those on CD-ROMS). The transaction may 

include providing direction to services outside the library.

ß Number served in presentations to groups is the number of individuals 

served in presentations that were sponsored by the library and planned in 

advance. The presentation may cover instruction in library use, or cultural, 

recreational or educational presentations. Presentations given off the 

library site are included as long as they are sponsored by the library. 

ß Gate count of visitors to library per typical week is the number of 

persons who physically enter library facilities over the course of a week. 

A single person can be counted more than once.

ß Public service hours is the number of hours the physical facility is open 

for service for both the main library and its branches. 

Library Collections

ß Volumes of printed matter is the number of volumes of any printed, 

mimeographed, or processed work that has been included in the library's 

catalogs, including those electronically transmitted (e.g., downloaded) 

from other sources into the library catalog.

ß Serial subscriptions include paid and unpaid serials (e.g., Journal of 

Education Psychology), including government documents issued as 

serials (periodically). It excludes microforms, audiovisual materials (e.g., 

videos), and machine-readable materials. 

ß Cartographic materials represent the Earth (in whole or part) or any 

celestial body at any scale. They include graphic materials for viewing 

without sound. Examples are art originals, prints, reproductions, slides, 

photographs, posters, and films without sound. 

ß Sound recordings are audio items that are stored mechanically or 

electronically, or both.

ß Films and video materials include films produced in a variety of sizes; 

video materials include videotapes and laser disks and include government 

documents in this medium.
4

ß Computer files include materials such as CD-ROMS, magnetic tapes, 

and magnetic disks that are processed by a computer or similar machine. 

Examples are U.S. Census data tapes or electronic journals. Bibliographic 

records that are used to manage the collection are excluded. Government 

documents are included. 

ß Other materials include any items not already classified under a

preceding category. 

Library Staff 

ß Full-time equivalent (FTE) staff is the number of filled or temporarily 

vacant full-time equivalent (FTE) library positions. Part-time work is totaled 

and converted to FTE based on the number of hours the library uses as a fulltime workweek. 

ß Librarians and other professional staff are staff members doing work that 

requires professional education (the master's degree or equivalent) in the 

theoretical and scientific aspects of the library profession. The group also 

includes staff not librarians, who perform professionally equivalent tasks and 

have education and training in related fields.

ß Other paid staff is all other paid staff, except student assistants. This 

category includes clerical and technical staff but excludes maintenance and 

custodial staff.

ß Student assistants are students employed on an hourly basis to work on 

library-related tasks. This group includes both students whose wages are paid 

from funds under the library budget and those paid from other budgets, 

including the College Work-Study Program. 

Library Expenditures

ß Salaries and wages are expenditures for full-time and part-time salaries and 

wages before deductions. 

ß Information resources includes expenditures for the following materials:

ß books, serial backfiles (such as bound journal volumes), and other print 

materials;

ß current serials (e.g., periodicals, newspapers, annuals, proceedings and 

transactions of societies);

ß microforms (photographic reproductions of textual, tabular, or graphic 

materials reduced in size so that they can be used only with

magnification); 
5

ß audiovisual materials that are displayed by visual projection or

magnification or through sound reproduction or both; and

ß computer files and search services, materials considered part of the 

collection whether purchased or leased, such as CD-ROMs, magnetic 

tapes and magnetic disks that are designed to be processed by a 

computer or similar machine. Examples are U.S. Census data tapes or 

electronic journals, and reference tools (e.g., dictionary) on CD-ROM. 

ß Document delivery and interlibrary loan related expenditures include fees 

paid for photocopies, costs of telefacsimile transmission, royalties and access 

fees paid to bibliographic utilities.

ß Other expenditures include preservation, furniture and equipment, computer 

hardware and software to support library operations, and bibliographic utilities 

not elsewhere reported.

Other Terms Used in the Report

ß Full-time equivalent student is calculated based on the number of full-time 

students enrolled plus one-third of the number of part-time students. 

ß Education and general expenditures are the total expenditures for operating 

the institution, and include expenditures for instruction, administration, student 

services, research, libraries, public services, operation and maintenance of 

plant, scholarships and fellowships, and mandatory transfers (money

legislatively earmarked for postsecondary education). 

ß Carnegie classification is a grouping of postsecondary degree-granting 

institutions into categories developed by the Carnegie Foundation for the 

Advancement of Teaching. The categorization is based on a combination of 

levels of degrees awarded, and research funding levels. The Carnegie 

classification categories used are as follows: Research I and II; Doctoral I and 

II; Master’s I and II; Baccalaureate I and II; Associate of Arts; and 

Specialized.1 For table presentation, “level I” and “level II” of the Carnegie 

classifications were combined. In addition, there were 316 institutions that did 

not have a Carnegie classification and these were put into a “not classified” 

category (The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, A 

Classification of Institutions of Higher Education, 1994 Edition,

Princeton, NJ).

 

1

 Specialized institutions offer degrees ranging from the bachelor’s to the doctorate, at least 50 percent of which are in 

a single specialized field, e.g., theological seminaries, Bible Colleges, and other institutions offering degrees in 

religion, and schools of art, music, and design.
6

Coverage and Response

Of the 3,792 postsecondary degree-granting institutions, there were 172 institutions 

that did not have their own library but shared a library with one or more of 96 other 

institutions. These institutions were excluded from the survey. There were also 212 

institutions that were found to be ineligible to participate because they did not have an 

academic library as defined by the survey. Thus, in 1996, there were 3,408 

postsecondary degree-granting institutions with academic libraries in the 50 states and 

the District of Columbia.

Academic Library Survey Response Rates. The response rate for the 1996 

Academic Library Survey was 94 percent. Item response rates ranged from a high of 

92 percent for the questionnaire item on operating expenditures for books to 67 

percent for the item on numbers of government document titles held at the end of the 

year. Any items discussed in the text with less than 70 percent response rate are 

noted. Appendix tables A-1 to A-3 present further information on overall and item 

response rates. Except where noted, data were imputed for nonresponse.

Coverage and Time Frames. The report covers libraries in higher education 

institutions in the 50 states and the District of Columbia (D.C.). The focus of the report 

is on 1996 data with detailed comparisons to 1990. We also include selected 

historical trend comparisons with earlier reports in the series back to 1974. The 

Academic Library Survey has been conducted by NCES since 1966 at irregular 

intervals. Beginning with the 1990 survey, the Academic Library Survey has been 

conducted on a 2-year cycle. Although there have been changes in the questionnaire 

over the years, the series is generally considered to be continuous. Data collected 

since 1974 have been summarized and reported in the Digest of Education Statistics

in various years (e.g., table 412, 1996). To provide an historical context for this 

report, we have drawn upon these data published previously in the Digest.

For the 1996 data collection, library staff data were reported for fall 1996. Operating 

expenditures and library collections were reported for fiscal year (FY) 1996. Library 

circulation and interlibrary loans are also for FY 1996, and other library services are 

for a typical week in fall 1996. FY 1996 is defined as any 12-month period between 

July 1, 1995 and September 30, 1996, which corresponds to the institution’s fiscal 

year. In addition, new questions about electronic services available were added to the 

data collection instrument. 

To ensure complete coverage, imputed data are used in reporting all 1996 data. 

However, the percent change comparisons with 1990 data were calculated using only 

those institutions that responded to the item in both 1990 and 1996. These 

comparisons are made only for items in which 70 percent or more responded in both 

years. 

In 1996, there 

were 3,408 

postsecondary 

degree-granting 

institutions with 

academic 

libraries in the 

50 states and the 

District of 

Columbia

The Academic 

Library Survey 

response rate 

was 94.2 

percent in 1996
7

Classifications Used in the Report

The tables and charts in this report present the data by control (library at public, 

private institution); size of FTE student enrollment (less than 1,500; 1,500 to 4,999; 

5,000 or more); and the 1994 Carnegie Classification (see definition above). 

Appendix B (tables B-1 to B-13) includes tabulations of data by highest offering, a 

categorization based on the IPEDS classification of the highest degree awarded by the 

institution (doctor’s, master’s, bachelor’s, and less than 4-year).

Methodological Caution 

This is a descriptive report that focuses on information from a census of academic 

libraries in 1996 and includes summary information from previous similar census 

counts from other years. The presentation of numbers, proportions, and percentages is 

descriptive only of libraries in the period referenced. 

Appendix A contains methodological information for the 1996 survey. Appendix B 

contains detailed tables. Appendix C is the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) 

benchmark listing and appendix D is a copy of the 1996 questionnaire.
8
9

Not classified

Doctoral I and II 9%

3%

Master's I and II

15% Specialized

16%

Baccalaureate 

18%

Associate of Arts

35%

Research I and II

4%

Number and Diversity of Academic Libraries 

The term “academic library” includes a diverse group of libraries that share the mission 

of degree-granting postsecondary education in very different settings with a wide range 

of institutional histories and resource levels. In 1996, just over half the 3,408 

academic libraries were in private institutions (54 percent), and slightly less than half 

(46 percent) were in public institutions (table 1). The distribution of academic libraries 

by institution type/mission mirrors that of the distribution of postsecondary degreegranting institutions. By Carnegie Classification, Associate of Arts institutions had the 

largest number of academic libraries (1,182), with about one-third (35 percent) of the 

total. Approximately one-sixth of academic libraries were in each of the following: 

Baccalaureate I and II institutions (18 percent, or 599), Specialized institutions (16 

percent, or 558), and Master’s I and II (15 percent, or 518). Only 4 percent (125) of 

academic libraries were at Research I and II institutions, and another 3 percent (110) 

were at institutions classified as Doctoral I and II (figure 1 and table 1). 

Figure 1. —Distribution of academic libraries by Carnegie Classification of 

institutions: fall 1996

The largest 

proportion of 

academic 

libraries (35 

percent) were at 

Associate of 

Arts granting 

institutions

SOURCE: United 

States Department of 

Education, National 

Center for Education 

Statistics (NCES), 

Integrated 

Postsecondary 

Education Data System 

(IPEDS), “Academic 

Library Survey, 1996.”
 10

Historical Growth

In 1967, there were 2,145 academic libraries reported (Beazley, 1979). By 1974, 

there were 2,972 academic libraries reported; and in 1987, there were 3,438 (NCES, 

Digest of Education Statistics, 1996, table 412). There were 3,274 libraries in 

1992, 3,303 in 1994, and 3,408 in 1996. The number fluctuates, in part, based on 

the manner in which branch campuses were classified by the institution in each of the 

years, so it is not possible to conclude that there were more academic libraries in 1987 

than in 1996. 

Branch Libraries

In 1996, the 3,408 academic libraries reported a total of 2,532 branches. About 28 

percent (945) of the academic libraries reported having branch libraries. In 1996, 

among those having branches, the mean per library was 2.7 and the median was 1. By 

Carnegie Classification, the percentage having branches ranged from 16 percent in 

“Not classified” institutions and 18 percent in Specialized institutions to 94 percent in 

Research I and II institutions. Among those having branches, the mean number ranged 

from 1.7 in “Not classified” and Baccalaureate to 8.2 in Research institutions (table 

1).

Table 1. —Number of libraries, number with branch libraries and mean number of branches 

among academic libraries having a branch by institutional characteristics: fall 1996

Institutional 

characteristic Total libraries

Libraries with 

branches Branches

Number Percent Number Percent Number Mean 

Total ................................. 3,408 100% 945 27.7% 2,532 2.7 

Control 

Public............................... 1,573 46.2 503 32.0 1,409 2.8 

 Private ............................. 1,835 53.8 442 24.1 1,123 2.5 

Carnegie Classification 

Research I and II............ 125 3.7 117 93.6 956 8.2 

 Doctoral I and II............. 110 3.2 81 73.6 244 3.0 

 Master’s I and II............ 518 15.2 157 30.3 288 1.8 

 Baccalaureate I and II... 599 17.6 138 23.0 237 1.7 

 Associate of Arts.......... 1,182 34.7 299 25.3 538 1.8 

 Specialized...................... 558 16.4 102 18.3 181 1.8

 Not classified ................. 316 9.3 51 16.1 88 1.7

SOURCE: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), 

Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), “Academic Library Survey, 1996.”

Just over onefourth (28 

percent) of 

academic libraries 

have branch 

libraries
 11

Academic Library Services 

The introduction and expansion of electronic technology in academic libraries is greatly 

changing library services and operations. A new section on the 1996 Academic 

Library Survey (ALS) form was designed to capture information on the availability of 

a variety of library electronic services. We first discuss this information and then the 

more traditional measures of library service, such as circulation, library loans, 

reference transactions, and gate count.

Electronic Services

The 1996 ALS included over a dozen new categories related to electronic services. 

These services are:

• electronic catalogs (e.g., electronic listing of the libraries holdings);

• electronic indexes (e.g., citation indexes) and reference tools (e.g., 

encyclopedias); 

• electronic full-text periodicals (e.g., academic journals);

• electronic full-text course reserves (e.g., copies of unpublished papers used for 

a course);

• electronic files other than the catalog (e.g., Statistical Abstract access);

• Internet access (e.g., access to the Internet from an account assigned to the 

library);

• library reference service by e-mail (e.g., purchased or acquired services to 

obtain reference information beyond that obtained in catalogs);

• capacity to place interlibrary loan or document delivery requests electronically; 

 

• electronic document delivery by the library to patron’s account or address;

• computers not dedicated to library functions for patron use inside the library; 

• computer software for patron use inside the library (e.g., city street locating 

map software);

• technology in the library to assist patrons with disabilities (e.g., work stations 

for the physically disabled); and

• instruction by library staff on use of Internet resources.

For each service, information was obtained on whether the library provided the 

service from inside the library and from elsewhere on campus. Information was also 

obtained on whether the service was available from off-campus and to whom access 

was givento the primary clientele (students and faculty) only, or to others who were 

not enrolled or employed at the institution. Before beginning
12

this discussion, we note that the use of electronic services is changing rapidly in 

libraries. The section below reports on the status of these services in 1996.

Electronic Reference Tools. Electronic reference databases include indexing and 

abstracting services, encyclopedias, dictionaries, directories, and statistical

compilations. By 1996, more than 9 of every 10 institutions (91.2 percent) offered 

electronic indexes and reference tools within the library (figure 2 and table 2). At 

roughly half the institutions, users could access the services from elsewhere on campus 

(53 percent) orin the case of primary clientelefrom off campus (43 percent). The 

proportion of institutions providing reference access from outside the library ranged 

considerably by type of institution. Nearly all Research institutions (98 percent) 

provided off-campus reference services for primary clientele, while just under 40 

percent of Associate of Arts libraries did so. Less than one in five institutions (19 

percent) provided off-campus access for individuals other than primary clientele (table 

2 and appendix B, table B-12).

Electronic Catalogs that list library holdings might consist solely of the library’s 

Online Public Access Catalog (OPAC) or of the library’s OPAC along with other 

databases. In 1996, four out of five academic libraries (80 percent) made available an 

electronic catalog that included the library’s holdings to clients inside the library, and 

59 percent made the electronic catalog available to primary clientele off campus. In 

1996, just over half (56 percent) made an electronic catalog available to others offcampus (table 2).
13

Table 2.— Percentage of institutions offering various electronic services by type of access: 

1996

Access from Access off campus 

Electronic service Within 

library

Elsewhere 

on campus

Primary 

clientele

Others

Electronic indexes and reference tools 91.2% 52.5% 43.0% 18.5%

Internet access 80.9 76.9 50.4 23.9

Electronic catalogs that include the library’s holdings 79.9 59.9 58.5 55.5

Electronic full-text periodicals 69.7 38.1 31.8 11.0

Capacity to place interlibrary loan/document delivery 

requests electronically

60.0 31.6 30.6 11.5

Library reference service by e-mail 40.1 38.8 36.4 22.5

Electronic files other than the catalog 38.1 28.1 26.4 24.0

Electronic full-text course reserves 6.3 5.1 4.5 1.7

NOTE: Unlike all other data items, data items on electronic services were not imputed. All electronic services items 

had above 80 percent response.

SOURCE: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), 

Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), “Academic Library Survey, 1996.”

Electronic Full Text. Electronic journals consist of original material available only in 

electronic form—either for free (via a link to a gopher or Web site) or for a 

subscription fee—and material previously published in hard copy and now available 

electronically for a subscription or access fee. Nearly 70 percent of academic 

libraries provided users within the library electronic access to the full-text of some 

periodicals in 1996. Public institutions (84 percent) seemed to provide this access 

more frequently than did private institutions (57 percent). Access from outside of the 

library was available less frequently at all types of institutions, whether by users oncampus (38 percent of institutions), by primary clientele off campus (32 percent), or 

by others off campus (11 percent) (table 2 and appendix B, table B-12).
 14

Figure 2.—Percentage of academic libraries having selected types of

electronic services available from within library and elsewhere on 

campus: fall 1996

SOURCE: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics 

(NCES), Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), “Academic Library Survey, 1996."

28%

32%

38%

60%

53%

38%

60%

70%

80%

91%

77%

39%

5%

81%

40%

6%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Electronic full-text course reserves

Electronic files other than the catalog

Library reference service by e-mail

Capacity to place interlibrary loan/document delivery

requests electronically

Electronic full-text periodicals

Electronic catalogs that include the library’s holdings

Internet access

Electronic indexes and reference tools

Access from elsewhere on campus Access from within library
15

Reserve Materials. Overall in 1996, the percentage of all academic libraries 

providing electronic access to full-text of course reserves was 6 percent. This small 

percentage may be related to the burden involved, copyright concerns, or because the 

concept was relatively new. Thirty-two percent of Research institutions and 18 

percent of Doctoral institutions reported electronic access to the full text of course 

reserves (table 2 and appendix B, table B-12). 

Internet Use. Users can access the Internet in a variety of ways, including via telnet, 

FTP (file transfer protocol), e-mail, gopher, and WWW (World Wide Web). In the 

1996 ALS survey, 81 percent of institutions reported the provision of Internet access 

from within libraries, and nearly as many cited its availability from elsewhere on 

campus (77 percent) (table 2). Depending on the type of institution, from two-thirds 

(68 percent of “not classified” institutions) to almost all (99 percent of Research I and 

II institutions) offered Internet access from the library (appendix B, table B-12). Offcampus access to the Internet was possible by primary clientele at half the institutions 

(50 percent) and by others at one-fourth of the institutions (24 percent) (table 2). 

Along with Internet access, library staff at three-fourths of the institutions (75 percent) 

offered instruction on the use of Internet resources (table 3).

Institutions also supplied computer hardware and software for use inside the library for 

non-library purposes. Computer software might include text-only CD-ROMs, 

multimedia CD-ROMs, and software programs. More than 6 of every 10 institutions 

provided computers that were not dedicated to library functions (63 percent) and 

computer software (61 percent) (table 3).

Electronic Support Services. By 1996, libraries had integrated electronic 

capabilities into their support services. At 60 percent of institutions, users could place 

interlibrary loans or document delivery requests electronically from within the library. 

About half as many institutions (32 percent) enabled on-campus users outside of the 

library to make such requests (appendix B, table B-12). The ability to deliver the 

documents electronically to patrons’ accounts or address was less common.

Approximately one of every six institutions (17 percent) offered that service in 1996 

(table 3).
16

Table 3.—Percentage of institutions with selected electronic services, by institution control, 

size, and Carnegie Classification: fiscal year (FY) 1996

Institution characteristic

Instruction 

by library 

staff on use 

of Internet 

resources

Computers 

not dedicated 

to library 

functions for 

patron use 

inside the 

library

Computer 

software for 

patron use 

inside the 

library

Technology 

in the library 

to assist 

patrons with 

disabilities

Electronic 

document 

delivery by 

the library to 

patron’s 

account

All ....................................... 75.4% 63.4% 60.5% 42.1% 16.5%

 Public ................................. 82.3 62.8 58.0 62.0 19.0

 Private................................ 69.1 64.0 62.7 23.8 14.2

Size (FTE enrollment)

 Less than 1,500 ................... 65.9 65.3 64.8 23.4 12.7

 1,500-4,999 ........................ 82.3 57.8 54.4 52.1 17.3

 5,000 or more ..................... 91.9 67.7 58.3 80.8 26.4

Carnegie Classification

 Research I and II................. 100.0 81.5 67.2 90.8 33.3

 Doctoral I and II.................. 97.1 70.2 63.7 73.5 33.3

 Master’s I and II ................. 90.9 63.2 59.0 58.6 22.4

 Baccalaureate I and II........... 80.8 64.9 61.8 28.2 20.2

 Associate of Arts.............. 69.6 57.4 55.5 48.1 10.8

 Specialized .......................... 60.3 68.7 67.0 17.7 12.0

 Not classified ...................... 66.7 65.6 65.1 25.5 15.5

SOURCE: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), 

Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), “Academic Library Survey, 1996.”

Access to library reference service by e-mail was a feature offered at about 4 of every 

10 institutions for users within the library (40 percent) and elsewhere on campus (39 

percent). This service was available to users within the library in 85 percent of 

Research institutions and 28 percent of Associate of Arts institutions (table 2 and 

appendix B, table B-12).

A number of libraries have electronic services in place to help patrons with disabilities. 

Such services might include computer workstations for the physically disabled, reading 

machines for the blind, and TTY/TDD equipment for the deaf. In 1996, 42 percent of 

institutions reported that the library had technology to assist patrons with disabilities 

(table 3). Descriptively speaking, it appears that in 1996 such services were found 

more often at public institutions (62 percent) than at private institutions (24 percent), 

and at Research institutions (91 percent) than at Specialized institutions (18 percent).
17

Circulation, Library Loans, Reference Transactions, Hours of Service, and 

Presentations

As the movement toward “virtual libraries” and remote access continues, questions 

arise as to the impact these changes may have over time on the count of traditional 

library services such as circulation, reference transactions, frequency of visits to the 

library, and hours of service.

Items Borrowed (Circulation)

In 1996, general circulation was 186.5 million transactions per year, and reserve 

circulation totaled 44.9 million transactions per year (table 4). General circulation per 

full-time-equivalent student was 18.5 transactions and reserve circulation per full-time 

equivalent student was 4.5 transactions (table 4).

Table 4.—Total number of services provided and number per full-time-equivalent 

(FTE) student by type of service: fiscal year 1996 and percent change from 

1990

Service category

Total 

number in 

thousands 

1996

Percent 

change 

1990-96

Number 

per FTE 

enrollment 

1996

Percent 

change 

1990-96

General circulation transactions per year...... 186,545 12.8% 18.5 6.6%

Reserve circulation transactions per year....... 44,880 * 4.5 *

Loans to other libraries per year....................... 9,431 * 1.0 *

Loans from other libraries per year................... 7,512 63.5 0.8 54.3

Reference transactions per week...................... 1,871 -10.5 0.2 -15.3

Served in presentations to groups per year.... 7,388 * 0.7 *

Visits to library (gate count) per week............. 16,456 * 1.6 *

*Less than 70 percent response in either 1990 or 1996 or both years.

NOTE: Totals reported for 1996 include imputed data to account for nonresponse. Calculations of percent 

change include only those institutions reporting in both 1996 and 1990 and are reported only for variables 

in which 70 percent or more of libraries reported for the item in both 1990 and 1996. FTE student is 

calculated by taking one-third of part-time enrollment and adding the amount to full-time enrollment. Loans 

made to other libraries are higher than loans received from other libraries because loans are sometimes 

made to entities other than academic libraries such as public libraries or libraries sponsored by the 

government. 

SOURCE: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), 

Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), “Academic Library Surveys, 1990 and 1996”;

and “Fall Enrollment Surveys, 1989 and 1995.”

General 

circulation per 

FTE student was 

18.5 transactions 

per year in 1996
18

Change in General Circulation Transactions Since 1990. When the set of 

institutions reporting in both 1990 and 1996 are compared, there was an increase of 

13 percent in general circulation over the period. General circulation per FTE student 

increased 7 percent between 1990 and 1996 (table 4). 

Differences in General Circulation Transactions by Institution Type. 

Descriptively, general circulation per FTE student varies considerably by institution 

type, ranging from 8.1 in Associate of Arts granting institutions to 35.5 in Specialized 

and 32.4 in Research I and II institutions (table 5). Circulation per FTE student was 

higher in private than public institutions. Circulation transactions per FTE student were 

23.5 in private institutions and 16.9 in public institutions (table 5).

Table 5.—General circulation per full-time-equivalent (FTE) student by Carnegie 

Classification: 1996 

Institutional characteristic General circulation per FTE in 1996

Total Public Private

Carnegie Classification 

All........................................................... 18.5 16.9 23.5

Research I and II................................... 32.4 30.6 39.2

Doctoral I and II.................................... 18.6 17.6 21.4

Master’s I and II................................... 15.4 15.6 14.8

Baccalaureate I and II.......................... 20.0 16.4 21.0

Associate of Arts................................. 8.1 8.1 8.5

Specialized............................................. 35.5 36.3 35.2

NOTE: Data reported for 1996 include imputed data to account for nonresponse. FTE enrollment 

is calculated by taking one-third of part-time enrollment and adding the amount to full-time 

enrollment.

SOURCE: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics 

(NCES), Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), “Academic Library Surveys, 

1990 and 1996," and "Fall Enrollment Surveys, 1989 and 1995”.
19

Interlibrary Loans

While internal general circulation has increased modestly in recent years, interlibrary 

loans exhibit larger increases, perhaps reflecting the wider access to on-line library 

college catalogs, and the strategy of shared resources. The total number of items 

loaned through interlibrary loan was 9.4 million, and the number received was 7.5 

million in 1996. The figures from the institutions reporting in both 1990 and 1996 

indicate there was an increase of 64 percent in items borrowed from other libraries. 

Considered per FTE student, items borrowed increased 54 percent over the 6-year 

period from 1990 to 1996 (table 4).

Ratio of Interlibrary Items Loaned to Items Borrowed. The total number of 

interlibrary loans received (7.5 million in 1996) was less than items loaned (9.4 million 

in 1996) because academic libraries also loan to nonacademic libraries (table 4). The 

Association of Research Libraries (ARL) has selected the “ratio of items loaned to 

items borrowed” as an indicator, and this is an example of how an indicator can vary 

considerably by type of institution. A ratio of 1 indicates that a library lends items at 

the same rate it borrows. A number greater than 1 indicates a library lends more items 

than it borrows. A number less than 1 indicates that a library borrows more than it 

lends.

Among those libraries having at least one item loaned and one item borrowed through 

interlibrary loan, the mean per institution ratio of items lent to items borrowed was 2.2. 

However, the median per institution was .96 (data not shown). This difference 

between the mean and the median reflects a very skewed distribution of the ratio 

across the different types of institutions. The mean ratio was 1.4 in Baccalaureate, 

Associate of Arts, and “not classified” institutions, was 1.9 in Research institutions, 

and was 6.0 in Specialized institutions (figure 3). As one might expect, institutions with 

specialized collections and large collections such as those at research institutions are 

more likely to be called upon to loan more than they borrow. 

Interlibrary loans 

received increased 

by 64 percent 

between 1990 and 

1996
20

Figure 3.—Mean ratio of items loaned to items received through 

interlibrary loans by Carnegie Classification: 1996

SOURCE: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), 

Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), “Academic Library Survey, 1996.

Reference Transactions

A total of 1.9 million reference transactions per week (including computer searching) 

were reported in 1996 (table 4). Fewer libraries reported information on reference 

transactions (82 percent) than on general or reserve circulation transactions (92 

percent for general items and 85 percent for reserve items). Only about 60 percent of 

the libraries reported reference transactions in both 1990 and 1996, so it is not 

possible to include this item in the change comparisons over that period. Moreover, 

the interpretation of reference transactions may be inconsistent and is changing with the 

use of electronic searching for information. A descriptive comparison of the data for 

1994 and 1996 for the total libraries indicates that this category declined slightly over 

the two-year period.

Visits to the Library (Gate Count)

Academic libraries reported a total gate count of 16.5 million visits per week or 1.6 

visits per FTE student per week (table 4). As in past surveys, this item also had lower 

than average item response, with only 78 percent of libraries reporting on the gate 

count (compared to 82 percent average item response). 

2.3

6

1.5

1.4

1.4

1.4

1.9

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Not classified

Specialized

Associate of Arts

Baccalaureate I and II

Master's I and II

Doctoral I and II

Research I and II
21

Public Service Hours

On average, academic libraries were open 76 hours per week in 1996. The mean 

hours ranged from 66 in Associate of Arts institutions to 107 in Research I and II 

institutions (figure 4). The largest number of academic libraries (44 percent) was open 

between 60 and 79 hours; another 40 percent, however, were open 80 or more 

hours. About 17 percent were open under 60 hours and 3 percent were open less 

than 40 hours (calculated from appendix B, table B-2). 

Eighty institutions were open 120 or more hours per week and 31 were open more 

than 150 hours per week. This later group is very close to being open 7 days a week 

and 24 hours a day.

Figure 4.—Percentage distribution of academic libraries by public service 

hours per week and mean public service hours per week by 

Carnegie Classification: 1996

Distribution of public service hours

SOURCE: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), 

Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), “Academic Library Survey, 1996” and “Fall 

Enrollment Survey, 1995.”

Mean public service hours 

per week

Hours

All degree-granting 

postsecondary

institutions........................... 75.9

Research I and II................. 107.0

Doctoral I and II.................. 97.0

Master’s I and II ................. 89.5

Baccalaureate I and II......... 86.0

Associate of Arts ............... 65.5

Specialized ........................... 72.9

80 or more 

hours

40%

60-79 hours

44%

Under 60 hours

17%
22
23

Academic Library Collections 

For some time, faced with the ever-mushrooming number of publications, academic 

librarians have spoken of the shift from acquisition to access and the “decline of 

ownership” (Battin, 1989; Kyrillidou, Maxwell, Stubbs, 1996). As we have seen in 

the discussion of growth in electronic services, with the development of new

information age technology, the traditional notion of a library as a physical facility 

housing primarily paper-based materials has given way to a new image. The academic 

library is sometimes thought of as a range of services and collections made accessible 

through networks (Hughes, 1992). At the same time that the information technology 

revolution is occurring, new technology for information storing and processing have 

meant that the categories of materials making up a library collection have been 

expanded. While new electronic media are growing in importance, by the mid-1990s a 

small fraction of recorded information was actually available in electronic format. 

Moreover, there continue to be challenges in deciding which documents should be 

reformatted into electronic form and in providing continued access to these

reformatted materials, as well as to those that will never be reformatted (Ardis, 1994).

The Academic Library Survey (ALS) questionnaire has been revised to reflect these 

changes over the years and continues to be revised. In 1996, the collection categories 

for which counts were obtained included:

• books and bound serials;

• government documents;

• current serials;

• graphic materials;

• sound recordings;

• film and video materials;

• computer files;

• linear feet of manuscripts and archives;

• microforms;

• cartographic materials; and

• other library materials.
24

The number of titles a library holds in its collection was also collected for books, 

government documents not elsewhere classified, serials, microforms, sound

recordings, films and video materials, and computer files. Beginning with the 1994 

ALS survey, the term “computer files” replaced the term “machine readable

materials” used in earlier surveys. Definitions of these items are presented in the 

introductory section of this report. 

Library Collection Summary

Collections may be reported either in terms of counts of volumes or units (in which 

case some holdings may represent multiple copies of the same work) or in a manner in 

which each title is counted only once (referred to as unduplicated titles). In 1996, 

there were nearly 807 million volumes and 449 million unduplicated titles of books, 

bound serials, and government documents accessible through the academic library 

catalogs (table 6). In addition, there were 67 million government document titles not 

elsewhere classified.

Table 6.—Total number of library materials held and added per full-time-equivalent (FTE) 

student: fiscal year (FY) 1996

Held at end of FY 1996 Added during FY 1996

Category Number in 

thousands

Per FTE 

student 

Number in 

thousands

Per FTE 

student 

Added as 

percentage of held

Volumes, units, and linear feet

Books and bound serials.................................. 806,717 80.6 21,346 2.1 2.6%

Microform units................................................. 1,015,714 101.7 38,173 3.8 3.8%

Cartographic materials ...................................... 33,880 3.4 658 0.1 1.9%

Graphic materials ............................................... 95,860 9.6 1,952 0.2 2.0%

Manuscripts and archives, linear feet............ 4,311 0.7 223 0.0 5.2%

Titles

Books and bound serials.................................. 449,179 44.8 12,333 1.2 2.7%

Government documents not reported 

elsewhere ............................................................ 67,314 6.7 * 0.3 4.1%

Current paid and unpaid serial

subscriptions..................................................... 5,709 0.7 274 ** 4.8%

Microforms ........................................................ 181,203 18.1 7,331 0.7 4.0%

Sound recordings.............................................. 9,206 0.9 337 ** 3.7%

Films and video materials ................................. 3,916 0.4 421 ** 10.8%

Computer files.................................................... 983 0.1 158 ** 16.1%

 *Less than 70 percent reporting in 1996.

**Less than .1 per FTE student

NOTE: FTE student is calculated by taking one-third of part-time enrollment and adding the amount to fulltime enrollment in 3,408 institutions having academic libraries.

SOURCE: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Integrated 

Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), "Academic Library Survey, 1996" and "Fall Enrollment Survey, 1995."
25

As in 1994, the category of materials with the most units was microforms, with 1,106 

million units and 181 million unduplicated titles (table 6). A total of about 5.7 million 

paid and unpaid unduplicated serial subscriptions were reported. There were

approximately 9.2 million titles of sound recordings, 3.9 million of films and videos, 

and 1.0 million of computer files.

Items Added as Percentage of Items Held. As in other ALS surveys in the 1990s, 

computer files and films and videos in 1996 continued to exhibit higher relative growth 

rates than other material collection categories (table 6). The ratio of items added to 

items held was 16 percent for computer files and 11 percent for films and video 

materials. In contrast, additions to other categories ranged from 3 percent for book 

titles to 5 percent for serial subscriptions.

Change in Volumes Held and Added 

The number of book and bound serial volumes held and added during the year are 

statistics that have been consistently collected for a number of years and have had high 

reporting rates. In 1974, a total of 447 million volumes were counted in the nation’s 

academic libraries and, by 1996, a total of 807 million volumes were counted (figure 

5). 

Figure 5.—Total number of books and bound serial volumes held in 

academic libraries: 1974 to 1996 (volumes in thousands)

SOURCE: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Digest 

of Education Statistics, 1996, table 412; Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS),

“Academic Library Survey, 1996.”

806,717

447,059

776,447

717,042

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

700,000

800,000

900,000

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

Year

Number of volumes in thousands
26

Increase Relative to Enrollment. Between 1974 and 1996, the total number of 

volumes counted as held in academic libraries increased by 80 percent while the 

total number of FTE students increased by 25 percent (8 million to 10 million). This 

difference is reflected in the number of volumes held per FTE student, which went 

from 57 to about 81 over the 22-year period (an increase of 35 percent). As figure 

6 and table 7 show, most of the increase in volumes per FTE student occurred in 

the period prior to 1987. Since 1987, the number of volumes per FTE student has 

fluctuated between 72 and 81, in part a reflection of differences in FTE student 

counts. 

Figure 6.—Number of volumes of books and bound serial volumes held per 

full-time-equivalent (FTE) student: 1974-1996 

SOURCE: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Digest 

of Education Statistics, 1996, table 412; Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), 

“Academic Library Survey, 1996” and “Fall Enrollment Survey, 1995.”

Between 1974 and 

1996, the number 

of FTE students 

increased 25 

percent and 

volumes increased 

by 80 percent

57.3 57.9

62.3 63

70.6

77.8

71.8

74.9

77.6

80.6

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
27

Number of Volumes Added Per Year. The increase in the number of volumes 

held over time is the result of a rather steady number of volumes added each year 

rather than increases in the rate of additions. The number of volumes added each 

year shows little change over the 22-year period, ranging from 23.2 million in 1974 

to a low of 19.0 million in 1990 (table 7). In 1996, 21.3 million volumes were 

added. The number added per FTE student declined between 1974 and 1990 

going from a high of 3.0 in 1974 to a low of 1.9 in 1990 (table 7 and figure 7). In 

1996, there were 2.1 volumes added per FTE student. 2

Table 7.—Number of books and bound serial volumes held and added per 

full-time equivalent (FTE) student, and number of serial

subscriptions held: 1974-1996 

Volumes held Volumes added

Serial 

subscriptions 

held

Year

Number in 

thousands

Per FTE 

student 

Number 

in 

thousand

s Per FTE student 

Number in 

thousands

1974.... 447,059 57.3 23,242 3.0 4,434

1976.... 481,442 57.9 22,367 2.7 4,670

1978.... 519,895 62.3 21,608 2.6 4,775

1981.... 567,826 63.0 19,507 2.2 4,890

1984.... 631,727 70.6 20,658 2.3 6,317

1987.... 718,504 77.8 21,907 2.4 6,416

1990.... 717,042 71.8 19,003 1.9 5,749

1992.... 749,429 74.9 20,982 2.0 6,966

1994.... 776,447 77.6 21,544 2.2 6,621

1996.... 806,717 80.6 21,346 2.1 6,588

NOTE: Figures per FTE student for 1974 to 1992 were taken from the Digest of Education

Statistics, 1996, table 412. The figures were calculated on the basis of total FTE students for the 

various years. FTE students are the number of full-time enrolled plus one-third of the part-time 

enrollment.

SOURCE: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics 

(NCES), Digest of Education Statistics, 1996, table 412; Integrated Postsecondary Education 

Data System (IPEDS), “Academic Library Survey, 1996” and “Fall Enrollment Survey, 1995.”

 

2

 It has been suggested by a reviewer from the American Association of Research Librarians that one of the reasons 

volumes held is increasing is because of the availability/incorporation of government documents under volumes 

held. 

The number of 

volumes added per 

year has not 

increased over the 

last 22 years
28

Figure 7.—Total number of books and bound serial volumes added per year 

in academic libraries per full-time-equivalent (FTE) student: 

1974-1996 

SOURCE: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), 

Digest of Education Statistics, 1996, table 412; and Integrated Postsecondary Education 

Data System (IPEDS), “Academic Library Survey, 1996” and “Fall Enrollment Survey, 1995." 

Change Since 1990 in Volumes Held

A comparison of the set of institutions reporting in both 1990 and 1996 shows that 

overall the number of books and bound serial volumes in library holdings increased 

by 16 percent and the number per FTE student increased by 10 percent over the 

period (table 8). These figures suggest that overall, despite the growth of other 

media, the number of bound printed volumes held continued to increase at rates 

higher than that of enrollment. The rates of increases were highest among private 

Research I and II institutions and public Doctoral I and II institutions. These 

institutions had increases of 20 to 21 percent in total volumes and 17 percent in 

volumes per FTE student (table 8). However, increases were not observed for all 

types of institutions, especially those with increasing enrollments. For example, 

Associate of Arts institutions experienced a decline of 2.1 percent over the period 

between 1990 and 1996 in volumes held per FTE student. 

3

2.7

2.6

2.2

2.3

2.4

1.9

2

2.2

2.1

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
 29

Table 8. —Number of books and bound serial volumes held at end of fiscal year 1996, 

volumes held per full-time-equivalent (FTE) student, and percent change since 

1990, by Carnegie Classification 

Volumes held at end 

of year Volumes per FTE student

Institutional characteristic

Number in 

thousands

Percent 

change 

1990-

1996

Number

Percent 

change 

1990-

1996

Lower

quartile Median Upper quartile

Total............................ 806,717 15.6% 81 9.5% 20 58 118 

 Public ........................ 469,864 15.3% 62 9.9% 16 32 64 

 Private....................... 336,853 16.2% 137 7.5% 36 91 181

Research I and II ........ 352,060 18.1% 154 17.0% 102 130 203

 Public ........................ 227,670 16.5% 125 16.2% 92 118 145

 Private....................... 124,391 21.3% 268 16.8% 162 245 395

Doctoral I and II.......... 89,204 18.0% 91 14.7% 61 86 123

 Public ........................ 56,673 20.2% 78 16.7% 60 70 107

 Private....................... 32,531 14.0% 128 11.1% 85 107 156

Master's I and II ......... 161,988 16.1% 69 10.1% 55 68 96 

 Public ........................ 110,891 15.4% 64 10.9% 51 64 81 

 Private....................... 51,098 17.6% 83 6.9% 60 78 113

Baccalaureate I and II. 98,134 11.4% 120 -0.3% 78 116 174

 Public ........................ 11,299 10.9% 63 1.2% 48 63 88 

 Private....................... 86,835 11.4% 136 -0.8% 87 130 186

Associate of Arts ......... 52,372 6.4% 17 -2.1% 12 19 32 

 Public ........................ 48,229 7.1% 17 -1.5% 13 19 28 

 Private....................... 4,143 * 26 -6.9% 6 18 58 

Specialized................... 43,082 10.3% 117 0.4% 38 115 315

 Public ........................ 11,025 7.0% 103 -5.4% 60 109 158

 Private....................... 32,057 11.5% 122 2.7% 36 118 373

Not classified............... 9,877 * 60 18.2% 9 27 100

*less than .05 percent

NOTE: Totals reported for 1996 include imputed data to account for nonresponse. Calculations of percent change include 

only those institutions reporting in both 1996 and 1990 and are reported only for variables in which 70 percent or more of 

libraries reported for the item in both 1990 and 1996. FTE student enrollment is calculated by taking one-third of part-time 

enrollment and adding the amount to full-time enrollment. Twenty-five percent of institutions fall into each quartile 

grouping. All institutions in the lower quartile were at or below the number given in the table for the lower quartile and all 

institutions in the upper quartile were at or above the upper quartile number. For example, all institutions within the lower 

quartile had 20 or fewer volumes per FTE student. Details may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Integrated 

Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), “Academic Library Surveys, 1990 and 1996,” and “Fall Enrollment 

Surveys, 1989 and 1995.”
30

Research I and II

45%

Doctoral I and II

11%

Baccalaureate I and II

12%

Master's I and II

20%

Not classified

1%

Specialized

5%

Associate of Arts

6%

Distribution of Volumes of Books and Bound Serials by Type of Institution

Traditionally, research institutions have maintained the largest collections to serve 

the needs of graduate students and research faculty. Research I and II institutions 

enroll about 23 percent of the total FTE students, and they have about 45 percent 

of all volumes of books and bound serials held (figure 8). The Associate of Arts 

institutions, enrolling 30 percent of the FTE students, hold 6 percent of the 

volumes.

Figure 8.—Percentage distribution of volumes of books and bound serials 

held at the end of the year and distribution of full-timeequivalent (FTE) student enrollment by Carnegie

Classification: 1996 

All degree-granting

postsecondary institutions..... 100%

Research I and II................. 23%

Doctoral I and II ................. 10%

Master’s I and II................. 24%

Baccalaureate I and II .......... 8%

Associate of Arts................. 30%

Specialized.......................... 4%

Not classified ...................... 2%

SOURCE: United States Department of 

Education, National Center for Education 

Statistics (NCES), Integrated 

Postsecondary Education Data System 

(IPEDS), “Academic Library Survey, 

1996” and “Fall Enrollment Survey, 1995.”

Distribution of FTE student enrollment:

1996
31

Differences in Volumes per FTE Student 

In 1996, the overall number of book and bound serial volumes per FTE student 

was 80.6 and the median per institution was 58 (table 8). The numbers per FTE 

student exhibit a wide range by institution type, from 17 per FTE student in public

Associate of Arts institutions to 268 in private Research I and II institutions (table 

8). The median number of volumes per FTE student per institution ranged from 18 

and 19 in public and private Associate of Arts institutions to 245 in private 

Research I and II institutions. 

Number of Volumes per Institution and Academic Library Standards

The number of book and bound serial volumes held per institution in 1996 ranged 

from 61,164 volumes in institutions with less than 1,500 students to nearly a million

(964,027 volumes) in institutions with 5,000 or more students (table 9). The 1995 

edition of Standards for College Libraries prepared by the Association of 

College and Research Libraries (ACRL)/College Library Section (CLS) Standards 

Committee gives a formula for estimating the number of volumes needed. This 

formula suggests that a basic collection should have at least 85,000 volumes and 

that there be an additional 15 volumes per FTE student and an additional 100 

volumes per FTE faculty. Furthermore, the formula states that there should be 350 

volumes per undergraduate major and minor and additional allowances for each 

master’s program (6,000 volumes), each specialist program (3,000 volumes), and 

each doctoral field (6,000 volumes). 

Thus, for example, a baccalaureate institution with 1,000 FTE undergraduates, 10 

major fields, and 50 faculty should have about 108,000 volumes. A master’s level 

institution with 10,000 FTE students, 250 faculty, 15 undergraduate majors, and 8 

master’s programs should have about 313,000 volumes. A doctoral degreegranting institution with 20,000 FTE students, 350 faculty, 15 undergraduate 

majors, 10 master’s programs, and 8 Ph.D. fields should have about 633,000 

volumes. One can see from the descriptions note above, and the numbers in table 

9, that smaller colleges appear to meet the standard infrequently, while Research 

universities seem to easily exceed the standard. For example, institutions with less 

than 1,500 students had 61,164 volumes per institution and a median number of 

volumes per institution of 35,166 (Table 9)—considerably less than the 108,000 

volumes that might be recommended based on the standards. In contrast, 

Research Institutions had a median of 2.3 million volumes—far exceeding the 

sample recommendation.

Library standards 

for 4-year 

colleges 

recommend a 

basic collection of 

85,000 volumes 

with additional 

volumes based on 

enrollment, 

faculty, number 

of majors, and 

types of degrees 

awarded

The number of 

volumes held per 

FTE student ranges 

from 17 in public 

Associate of Arts 

institutions to 268 

in private Research 

I and II institutions
32

The standards for community colleges awarding associate degrees are contained in 

the publication Standards for Community, Junior, and Technical College 

Learning Resource Programs, published in 1994 and prepared by a joint 

committee of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology 

(AECT) and the ACRL. The recommendations for number of volumes are directly 

linked to institution enrollment size, and range from 30,000 volumes for institutions 

with under 1,000 FTE students to 170,000 volumes for those with 17,000 to 

19,000 FTE students. One can see from table 9 that the Associate of Arts 

institutions with 44,308 volumes held per institution, and a median of 37,492 

volumes held just exceed the minimum standard for the smallest category of 

institutions, those with 1,000 FTE students. The average FTE enrollment of 

Associate of Arts institutions in 1996 was 2,539 (calculated from appendix A table 

A-4 and table 1).

Table 9.—Number of books and bound serial volumes per institution and percentage 

distribution of volumes held by institution control, size, and Carnegie Classification: 

fiscal year (FY) 1996

Institution characteristic

Total 

number of 

libraries

Total 

volumes at 

end of year 

in 

thousands

Per 

institution

Median per 

institution

Percent of 

total 

volumes 

held

All ....................................... 3,408 806,717 236,713 69,965 100% 

Control 

 Public ................................. 1,573 469,864 298,706 66,245 58.2%

 Private................................ 1,835 336,853 183,571 72,549 41.8%

Size (FTE students) 

 Less than 1,500 ................... 1,839 112,481 61,164 35,166 13.9%

 1,500-4,999 ........................ 1,014 156,309 154,151 88,354 19.4%

 5,000 or more ..................... 558 537,927 964,027 484,236 66.7%

Carnegie classification 

 Research I and II................. 125 352,060 2,816,481 2,301,269 43.6%

 Doctoral I and II.................. 110 89,203 810,944 724,470 11.1%

 Master’s I and II ................. 518 161,988 312,719 241,368 20.1%

 Baccalaureate I and II........... 599 98,134 163,830 119,093 12.2%

 Associate of Arts................. 1,182 52,372 44,308 37,492 6.5%

 Specialized .......................... 558 43,082 77,207 45,568 5.3%

 Not classified ...................... 318 9,877 31,061 8,754 1.2%

NOTE: Details may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), 

Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), “Academic Library Survey, 1996.”

Library standards 

for two-year

colleges 

recommend a 

minimum of 

30,000 volumes 

for institutions 

with under 1,000 

FTE enrollment 

and 170,000 for 

those with FTE 

enrollments of 

17,000-19,000
33

Academic Library Staff 

The development of electronic information databases and automation of many library 

technical functions have resulted in the redefining of a profession and a change in the 

composition of staff in academic libraries. Some tasks, previously handled by

professional librarians, have been assigned to newly emerging support staff. At the 

same time, the evolution of information technology requires sophisticated librarians 

who can provide enhanced information services (Oberg, 1992; Park and Riggs, 

1991; Cravey, 1991). Librarians have always served as the link between information 

resources and consumers of information. The academic librarian in the information age 

may spend more time instructing students in the skills of self-selecting and reviewing 

information from an ever-expanding information base. In addition, the library and 

librarians will maintain the essential infrastructure to accommodate the continuously 

evolving information environment. Figure 9 presents the distribution of academic 

library staff by type of staff in 1996.

Figure 9.—Percentage distribution of academic library full-time-equivalent 

(FTE) staff by type of staff: 1996

Student assistants

29%

Librarians and other 

professionals

29%

Other paid staff

42%

SOURCE: United States Department of 

Education, National Center for Education 

Statistics (NCES), Integrated 

Postsecondary Education Data System 

(IPEDS), “Academic Library Survey, 1996." 
34

Distribution of Full-Time-Equivalent (FTE) Library Staff by Type 

Academic libraries employed about 95,580 FTE staff in 1996.3 Of the total FTE 

library staff, 29 percent were librarians or other professional staff, and the same 

percentage was student assistants. The category "other paid staff" comprised the 

largest proportion of academic library staff, 42 percent (figure 9). 

The proportion of FTE library staff who are librarians and other professional staff 

was similar across institution type and control (see appendix B table B- 8). For 

example, the proportions were 27 percent in Research I and II institutions, 33 

percent in Specialized institutions; and 27 percent in public institutions and 30 

percent in private institutions. 

Full-Time-Equivalent (FTE) Staff per 1,000 FTE Students 

While the relative distribution of staff between professional, non-professional, and 

student assistants was similar by type of institution, the number of FTE library staff 

per 1,000 FTE students appears quite different. For example, in private Research I 

and II institutions the number of FTE library staff per 1,000 FTE students was 24.0 

and in public Research I and II institutions it was 12.3 (table 10). Similarly, in 

private Baccalaureate I and II institutions there were 14.3 FTE staff per 1,000

FTE students, while in public Baccalaureate I and II institutions there were 7.9 

FTE staff per 1,000 FTE students. 

 

3

Academic library staff were reported in the survey form in full-time-equivalent (FTEs) staff. 
35

Table 10.—Total academic library staff in 1996, number of staff per 1,000 full-time-equivalent 

(FTE) students in 1996, and percent change between 1990 and 1996 by control and 

Carnegie Classification

Total staff including 

student assistants Total staff including student assistants per 1,000 FTE 

students 

Institutional characteristic Number Percent 

change 

1990-

1996

Mean Percent 

change

1990-

1996

Lower 

quartile 

Median Upper 

quartile

Total 95,580 -1.3% 9.6 -6.5% 5.1 8.7 15.5

 Public.................................. 58,506 -1.8% 7.8 -6.4% 4.0 5.9 8.4

 Private ................................ 37,074 -0.6% 15.1 -7.4% 8.1 13.0 22.4

Research I and II................. 33,400 -1.0% 14.7 -1.6% 10.1 13.3 19.4

 Public.................................. 22,276 -1.0% 12.3 -1.1% 9.3 12.3 14.0

 Private ................................ 11,124 -1.0% 24.0 -3.7% 16.8 22.8 30.1

Doctoral I and II................... 10,301 5.5% 10.5 3.4% 7.8 10.2 13.8

 Public.................................. 6,587 3.5% 9.0 1.6% 7.1 8.9 10.7

 Private ................................ 3,714 9.5% 14.6 6.8% 10.6 13.4 17.5

Master's I and II.................. 19,465 -3.8% 8.3 -9.5% 6.5 8.4 11.3

 Public.................................. 13,014 -6.1% 7.5 -10.3% 6.0 7.2 9.0

 Private ................................ 6,451 1.0% 10.5 -8.8% 7.8 10.3 13.1

Baccalaureate I and II........ 10,537 -6.9% 12.9 -15.4% 8.7 12.4 17.8

 Public.................................. 1,427 -1.6% 7.9 -9.4% 6.2 7.8 10.2

 Private ................................ 9,109 -7.6% 14.3 -16.4% 9.7 13.4 19.1

Associate of Arts ................ 13,354 -3.9% 4.4 -11.6% 3.3 4.9 7.2

 Public.................................. 12,197 -4.1% 4.3 -11.8% 3.3 4.6 6.2

 Private ................................ 1,157 -0.5% 7.4 -6.0% 4.1 8.0 14.4

Specialized........................... 6,349 5.7% 17.2 -2.6% 10.7 19.7 36.4

 Public.................................. 1,782 1.6% 16.6 -10.2% 10.1 17.8 28.2

 Private ................................ 4,567 7.7% 17.4 1.2% 10.8 19.6 38.5

Not classified....................... 2,175 55.3% 13.1 55.8% 4.3 9.1 28.5

SOURCE: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Integrated Postsecondary 

Education Data System (IPEDS), “Academic Library Surveys, 1990 and 1996” and “Fall Enrollment Survey, 1995."

NOTE: Twenty-five percent of institutions fall into each quartile grouping. For any statistic, all institutions in the 

lower quartile fell at or below the number given in the table for the lower quartile and all institutions in the upper 

quartile were at or above the upper quartile number. For example, all institutions within the lower quartile had 5.1 or 

fewer staff per 1000 FTE students.
36

Change in Staff Over Time Since 1974

Figure 10 graphs FTE staff for total staff (excluding student assistants but including 

contributed services staff),4 other non-professional staff, and librarians and other 

professional staff from 1974 to 1996. Data on FTE student assistants are available 

and graphed only for the period after 1990. 

Figure 10.—Number of academic library full-time-equivalent (FTE) staff: 1974-1996 

SOURCE: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Digest 

of Education Statistics, 1996, table 412; and Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), 

“Academic Library Surveys, 1994 and 1996.”

 

4

 Contributed services staff are staff, such as members of religious orders, whose services are valued by booking 

entries rather than by full cash transactions. 

56,836

67,582

40,022

27,268 23,530

33,306

27,998 30,323

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

70000

80000

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

Total FTE library staff excluding student assistants FTE librarians and other professional staff

FTE other paid staff FTE student assistants
37

Between 1967 (not shown on graph) and 1977, the total number of non-student 

assistant library FTE staff grew from 43,500 in 1967 to 57,087 in 1977 (Beazley, 

1979). By 1988, this number was 67,300, and in 1990 the number was 69,359. 

Between 1990 and 1992, however, declines in library staffing were reported 

(Williams, 1994), with the total number of staff, including contributed services staff, 

being 67,166. The comparable number in 1996 was 67,582 (figure 10).

Change in Staff, Including Student Assistants. Comparable data on the number of 

FTE student assistants is available only since 1990. When the total library staff is 

considered (including student assistants) for institutions reporting in both 1990 and 

1996, we see that the total numbers have declined by 1.3 percent since 1990 (table 

10). When considered per 1,000 FTE students there was a decline of 6.5 percent 

between 1990 and 1996 (table 10). These declines occurred at both public and 

private institutions. The largest decline per 1,000 FTE students was at Baccalaureate 

I and II institutions (15.4 percent), followed by Associate of Arts institutions (11.6 

percent) and Master’s I and II institutions (9.5 percent). Library staff per 1,000 FTE 

students at Doctoral I and II institutions, on the other hand, increased by 3.4 percent.

Changes in Library Staff Relative to Total Institution Staff and Students 

Counts of library staff since the mid-1970s suggest that the number of academic 

library staff has not kept pace with student enrollment, and lags behind the increases 

experienced by the total postsecondary degree-granting institution staff. Over the 

period from 1976 to 1995 (two dates for which comparable figures on total FTE staff 

are available), the total full-time-equivalent number of FTE staff increased from 1.86 

million to 2.60 million (a 38 percent increase) and FTE students went from 8 million to 

10 million (a 25 percent increase). FTE faculty increased by 35 percent (calculated 

from Fall Staff in Postsecondary Institutions, 1995). In contrast, the number of 

FTE library staff (excluding student assistants) increased by 18 percent. FTE library 

professional staff increased by 17 percent over about the same period (1976 to 1996) 

(figure11).
 38

Figure 11.—Percent change in full-time-equivalent (FTE) academic library staff and 

postsecondary degree-granting institution FTE students and staff: 1976-1995/96

SOURCE: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), 

Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), “Academic Library Survey, 1996” and “Fall 

Staff in Postsecondary Institutions, 1995.”

NOTE: The time periods used in the calculations correspond to the years of scheduled data collections. 

Calculations of percent change for library-related staff are for the period 1976 to 1996. Calculations of 

percent change for students, faculty and all FTE staff in degree-granting postsecondary institutions are for 

1976 to 1995.

38%

35%

25%

18%

17%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%

Total FTE institution of

higher education staff

Total FTE faculty

Total FTE students

Total FTE library

staff(excluding student

assistants)

Total FTE library

professional staff

Percent change
 39

Academic Library Expenditures 

In 1996, academic library operating expenditures totaled just over 4.3 billion dollars. 

Library expenditures cover a wide range of materials and activities ranging from 

salaries and wages to postage for document delivery. In recent years the survey 

categories have been revised to include computer-related items and electronic 

information resources. Figure 12 provides the percent distribution for broad categories 

of expenditures, and the detailed categories for which separate expenditure

information was collected in 1996 are listed in table 11. 

Figure 12.—Percentage distribution of academic library operating 

expenditures by expenditure type and institution level: 1974 

and 1996 

SOURCE: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Digest of Education 

Statistics, 1996, table 412; and Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), “Academic Library Survey, 1996." 

10%

16% 16% 14%

30%

35% 35%

22%

60%

50% 48%

65%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Total: 1974 Total: 1996 4-year and above:

1996

Less than 4-year:

1996

Salaries and wages

Information resources

Other expenditures
40

Table 11.—Total operating expenditures for academic libraries in 1996, amount of 

expenditures per full-time-equivalent (FTE) student in 1996, and percentage 

distribution of expenditures in 1990 and 1996 by type of expenditures

Operating expenditures

Total 

expenditures 

in thousands

1996

Expenditures 

per FTE 

student 1996

Percent 

distribution 

of total 

expenditures 

1996

Percent 

distribution 

of total

expenditures

1990

Total.................................................... $4,301,815 $429.68 100.0% 100%

Salaries and wages............................... 2,147,842 214.47 49.9 52.0

Information resources......................... 1,499,249 149.77 34.9 34.1

 Current serial subscriptions................... 780,830 78.14 18.2 16.9

 Books and bound serials ....................... 472,592 47.09 11.0 12.3

 Microforms......................................... 61,577 6.14 1.4 1.0

 Audio-visual........................................ 28,879 2.87 0.7 0.7

 Document delivery............................... 17,645 1.76 0.4 0.3

 Computer files/search services .............. 103,539 10.34 2.4 2.3

 Other information resources.................. 34,186 3.42 0.8 0.6

Furniture and equipment..................... 56,128 5.60 1.3 1.5

Computer hardware and software ........ 157,949 15.78 3.7 1.9

Bibliographic utilities, networks, 

consortia.............................................. 85,113

 

 8.49 2.0

 

 1.1

Preservation ........................................ 45,610 4.57 1.1 1.1

Other operating expenditures.............. 264,314 30.99 6.1 8.2

NOTE: Amounts used for percent distribution calculation include imputed data in both 1990 and 1996. FTE student is 

calculated by taking one-third of part-time enrollment and adding the amount to full-time enrollment.

SOURCE: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), “Academic Library Surveys, 1990 and 1996,” and “Fall Enrollment Survey, 1995." 
41

Distribution of Library Operating Expenditures

As one can see from figure 12 and table 11, salaries and wages account for half (50 

percent) of all operating expenditures. Descriptively speaking, the proportion of 

expenditures spent on salaries and wages has declined over the last 20 years, going 

from 60 percent in 1974 to 50 percent in 1996 (figure 12).

The proportion of expenditures spent on salaries and wages was similar across public 

and private institutions and institutions of various enrollment sizes (52 percent in public 

institutions versus 47 percent in private). However, the proportion of the expenditure 

budget spent on salaries and wages at less than 4-year institutions was somewhat 

larger (65 percent) than at 4-year and above institutions (48 percent) (figure 12 and 

appendix table B-10). 

Table 11 shows that the detailed expenditure distributions in 1996 and 1990 are very 

similar, though the proportion of expenses attributed to new electronic resources and 

services was higher overall in 1996 than in 1990. In 1996, 8.1 percent of expenditures 

went to the combined categories of computer files and searches, computer hardware 

and software, and bibliographic utilities, networks, and consortia, compared to 5.3 

percent in 1990 (table 11). This increase in electronic services-related expenditures 

was consistent with that reported by other researchers. The Association of Research 

Libraries (ARL) reported that the percentage of library materials expenditures for 

electronic resources nearly doubled over 3 years3⁄4from 3.60 percent in 1992-1993 

to 6.97 percent in 1995-96 (ARL, Special Issue: Issues in Research Library 

Measurement, April 1998). 

Distribution of Information Resources Expenditures

An examination of the distribution of expenditures for information resources (figure 13) 

reveals the dominance of serials expenditures, which accounted for just over half (52 

percent) of all information resources expenditures. A number of library expenditure 

analyses also show the large proportion of information resource expenditures spent on 

serials and the increase in unit costs over the last 10 years. Statistics reported for 

research libraries by the ARL indicated that between 1986 and 1995, ARL libraries 

doubled expenditures for serials while buying 8 percent fewer titles (Kyrillidou, 

Maxwell, and Stubbs, 1996). 

The percentage of 

expenditures going 

to new electronic 

resources and 

services was about 

8.1 percent in 

1996 and 5.3 

percent in 1990 

Serial 

expenditures 

account for over 

one-half of 

information 

resource 

expenditures

The percentage of 

operating 

expenditures going 

to salaries and 

wages was 

60 percent in 1974 

and 50 percent in 

1996
42

Figure 13.—Distribution of academic library expenditures for information 

resources: 1996

SOURCE: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics 

(NCES), Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), "Academic Library 

Survey, 1996."

Change in Total Operating Expenditures and Operating Expenditures Per 

Full-Time-Equivalent (FTE) Student 

In current dollars, total operating expenditures have gone from $1.09 billion in 1974 to 

$4.30 billion in 1996. In constant 1996 dollars, total operating expenditures have 

gone from $3.47 billion to $4.30 billion (tabulated from NCES library statistics of 

colleges and universities, various years, and 1996 Academic Library Survey). Public 

academic libraries had 61 percent of the expenditures, and private academic libraries 

had 39 percent. Research I and II institutions accounted for 41 percent of the total 

academic library expenditures. Baccalaureate I and II institutions accounted for 9 

percent. Between 1990 and 1996, overall library expenditures increased by 10 

percent in constant dollars (table 12).

Other information 

resources

2%

Microforms

4%

Audiovisual 

materials

2%

Document delivery

1%

Computer 

files/search services

7%

Books and other 

print materials

32% Current serial 

subscriptions

52%
43

Table 12.—Total and per full-time-equivalent (FTE) student academic library operating 

expenditures, and percent change between 1990 and 1996 in constant dollars by 

control and Carnegie Classification

Total amount Per full-time-equivalent (FTE) student

Institutional 

characteristics

Amount in 

Thousands

Percent 

change 

1990-96 

in 

constant 

dollars

Mean Percent 

change 

1990-96 

in 

constant 

dollars

Lower 

quartile*

Median Upper 

quartile* 

Total.......................... $4,301,815 10.1% $431 4.4% $179 $310 $531

 Public ...................... 2,629,997 6.3 350 1.5 144 220 339

 Private..................... 1,671,819 17.3 682 8.7 258 417 754

Research I and II ...... 1,780,260 10.7 781 10.4 524 673 1,067

 Public ...................... 1,135,016 8.0 625 8.3 468 593 697

 Private..................... 645,244 16.3 1,390 13.4 899 1,223 1,823

Doctoral I and II........ 494,021 8.0 502 5.8 347 469 660

 Public ...................... 305,532 5.2 418 3.0 326 396 473

 Private..................... 188,489 14.1 741 11.6 508 660 769

Master's I and II ....... 810,453 8.0 344 1.7 270 333 435

 Public ...................... 561,129 2.8 322 -1.6 261 314 389

 Private..................... 249,324 22.2 406 9.6 292 377 485

Baccalaureate I and 

II...............................

388,732 13.8 476 1.9 285 390 581

 Public ...................... 54,171 3.6 301 -4.8 232 274 392

 Private..................... 334,561 15.6 525 2.6 298 409 623

Associate of Arts ....... 465,249 4.9 155 -3.1 118 169 244

 Public ...................... 432,888 4.0 152 -4.1 121 163 218

 Private..................... 32,361 28.3 207 28.4 102 212 381

Specialized................. 283,334 18.8 766 8.2 350 609 1,518

 Public ...................... 96,737 18.4 901 3.3 398 819 1,477

 Private..................... 186,597 19.0 711 10.6 337 592 1,528

Not Classified............ 79,765 32.8 481 31.3 126 281 1,094

NOTE: Amounts reported for 1996 include imputed data to account for nonresponse. Calculations of percent change 

include only those institutions reporting in both 1996 and 1990 and are reported only for variables in which 70 percent or 

more of libraries reported for the item in both 1990 and 1996. FTE enrollment is calculated by taking one-third of part-time 

enrollment and adding the amount to full-time enrollment. Details may not sum to totals because of rounding. Constant 

dollars calculated based on consumer price index as published in 1996 US Statistical Abstract, table 745, and Digest of 

Education Statistics, 1997, table 38.

*Twenty-five percent of institutions fall into each quartile grouping. For any statistic, all institutions in the lower 

quartile fell at or below the number given in the table for the lower quartile and all institutions in the upper quartile 

were at or above the upper quartile number. For example, all institutions within the lower quartile had $179 or less 

operating expenditures per FTE student.

SOURCE: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), “Academic Library Surveys, 1990 and 1996,” and “Fall Enrollment Survey, 1995." 
44

Expenditures Per Full-Time-Equivalent (FTE) Student. In constant dollars, 

expenditures per FTE student were $445 in 1974 and $431 in 1996. The lowest 

amount per FTE student occurred in 1981 when constant 1996-dollar 

expenditures were $372 and in 1990 when expenditures were $392 (figure 14).

Figure 14.—Academic library operating expenditures per full-timeequivalent (FTE) student in constant (1996) dollars: 1974-1996

NOTE: Constant 

dollars calculated 

based on Consumer 

Price Index (CPI) as 

published in Digest of 

Education Statistics, 

1997, table 38, and 

1996 US Statistical 

Abstract, table 745.

SOURCE: United 

States Department of 

Education, National 

Center for Education 

Statistics (NCES), 

Digest of Education 

Statistics, 1997, table 

412; and Integrated

Postsecondary 

Education Data System 

(IPEDS), “Academic 

Library Survey, 1994 

and 1996,” and “Fall 

Enrollment Survey, 

1995.”

$445

$406

$418

$433

$372

$406

$415

$392

$408

$425

$431

$360

$370

$380

$390

$400

$410

$420

$430

$440

$450

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
45

In constant dollars, between 1990 and 1996, overall expenditures per FTE student 

increased by 4.4 percent. Associate of Arts institutions, however, experienced a 

decline of 3.1 percent over the period (table 12). 

Expenditures per full-time-equivalent (FTE) student ranged from $152 per FTE 

student in public Associate of Arts institutions to $1,390 in private Research I and 

Research II institutions (table 12). Expenditures per FTE student in private institutions 

were about double those in public institutions ($682 and $350, respectively). Median 

expenditures per institution also showed an almost twofold difference between public 

and private institutions. The median expenditures per FTE student were $310 overall, 

$220 in public and $417 in private institutions (table 12).

Academic Library Operating Expenditures as a Percentage of Total Education 

and General (E&G) Expenditures 

Total Education and General (E &G) expenditures are collected in the IPEDS Finance 

Survey and this information has traditionally been used to look at the extent to which 

libraries are being supported financially. 

As part of the ongoing development of standards for academic libraries, the

Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) has established standards on 

the percentage of total institution expenditures that should go to academic libraries for 

two of the three categories of academic libraries. The Standards for Community, 

Junior, and Technical Learning Resource Programs and the Standards for 

College Libraries both established a standard that academic libraries should receive 6 

percent of their university’s total budget. The Standards for University Libraries

does not mention a specific percentage. However, the 6 percent goal is often also 

cited for this group as a target. Data on research libraries have shown that this goal has 

never been reached and in fact that the share has declined over the period from 1982-

1992 (Goudy, 1993; Cummings et. al, 1992).

Examination of the data for the total group of academic libraries for the period 1974-

1996 shows that the percentage of total institutional E&G expenditures spent by 

libraries appears to have declined from 3.9 in 1974 to 2.8 in 1996 (figure 15). 
 46

Figure 15.—Academic library operating expenditures as a percentage of 

total Education and General (E&G) expenditures: 1974-

1996 

Using the set of institutions reporting in both 1990 and 1996, we see that there was a 

decline of 7.5 percent in the percentage of the total E&G expenditures spent by 

academic libraries over the 1990-96 period (table 13). A decline was experienced by 

all categories of libraries except those in the “not classified” category (table 13).

SOURCE: United 

States Department of 

Education, National 

Center for Education 

Statistics (NCES), 

Digest of Education 

Statistics, 1996, table 

412; and Integrated 

Postsecondary 

Education Data System 

(IPEDS), “Academic 

Library Survey, 1996” 

and “Finance Survey, 

1996.”

3.9

3.8 3.8

3.7

3.5 3.4

3.2

3 3

2.9

2.8

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
 47

Table 13.—Academic library operating expenditures as a percentage of total Education and 

General (E&G) expenditures; and percent change between 1990 and 1996, by 

control and Carnegie Classification

Institutional 

characteristics

Percentage 

of total E&G 

expenditures 

1996

Percent 

change in 

percent of 

total E&G 

1990-96 

Lower 

quartile

Median Upper 

quartile 

Total.......................... 2.8% -7.5% 1.9% 2.7% 3.6%

 Public ...................... 2.7 -7.6 1.8 2.5 3.2

 Private..................... 2.9 -7.8 2.0 2.8 4.3

Research I and II ...... 2.9 -4.9 2.4 2.8 3.3

 Public ...................... 2.8 -4.3 2.5 2.8 3.2

 Private..................... 2.9 -6.6 2.2 2.8 3.6

Doctoral I and II........ 3.2 -10.7 2.3 3.1 3.7

 Public ...................... 3.3 -9.3 2.7 3.2 3.6

 Private..................... 3.2 -13.4 2.1 3.0 3.9

Master's I and II ....... 3.1 -9.1 2.4 2.9 3.5

 Public ...................... 3.3 -9.3 2.7 3.1 3.9

 Private..................... 2.7 -6.7 2.1 2.6 3.2

Baccalaureate I and II

..................................

3.0 -9.8 2.2 2.8 3.4

 Public ...................... 3.2 -13.5 2.8 3.3 3.8

 Private..................... 3.0 -9.2 2.1 2.7 3.3

Associate of Arts ....... 2.0 -11.4 1.5 2.2 3.0

 Public ...................... 2.2 -11.8 1.6 2.2 2.9

 Private..................... 1.2 -0.2 1.1 2.2 3.4

Specialized................. 2.2 -5.1 1.9 3.6 6.8

 Public ...................... 1.4 -4.1 1.4 1.9 2.9

 Private..................... 3.0 -7.4 2.2 4.1 7.2

Not classified............. 3.3 14.6 1.3 2.8 7.9

NOTE: Figures for 1996 include imputed data to account for nonresponse. Calculations of percent change 

include only those institutions reporting in both 1996 and 1990 and are reported only for variables in which 

70 percent or more of libraries reported for the item in both 1990 and 1996. Twenty-five percent of 

institutions fall into each quartile grouping. For any statistic, all institutions in the lower quartile fell at or 

below the number given in the table for the lower quartile and all institutions in the upper quartile were at 

or above the upper quartile number. For example, all institutions within the lower quartile had 1.9 percent 

or less of expenditures for academic libraries.

SOURCE: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), 

Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), “Academic Library Surveys, 199

“IPEDS Finance Surveys 1990 and 1996.”
 48

Summary/Conclusion

The first half of the 1990s was a time of rapid change in methods of information 

dissemination. By 1996, 90 percent of academic libraries made electronic reference 

services available. Almost 80 percent of academic libraries had electronic catalogs, 

and over half of these were made available to off-campus clients. Eighty-one percent 

provided Internet access from within the library. While general circulation increased 

modestly, there were larger increases in the use of interlibrary loans, reflecting the 

increasingly open computerized access to catalogs. 

Descriptive statistics suggest that while the number of book volumes held in collections 

increased from 1990 to 1996, the number per FTE student increased only slightly 

since 1987. The number of volumes added per year appears to have remained 

relatively constant since 1974, ranging from 23,000 in 1974 to a low of 19,507 in 

1990. In 1996, this number was at 21,000. Information resources such as computer 

files and films and videos had the highest ratios of items added to items held, reflecting 

the relative newness of these categories of materials and building of collections in these 

areas. 

Descriptively speaking, there continue to be large differences in the number of volumes 

per FTE student between institutions by Carnegie classification. The number of 

volumes per FTE student ranged from 17 in Associate of Arts institutions to 154 in 

Research I and II institutions. Associate of Arts institutions have 6 percent of all 

volumes held across libraries while having almost one third of FTE student enrollment 

(30 percent).

In a period of increasing library automation and change in library staff roles, the actual 

total number of FTE academic library staff has declined slightly between 1990 and 

1996—reflecting a trend also observed in 1992 and 1994 (Rossi and Daugherty, 

1997; Cahalan and Justh, 1998). The number of staff reported per 1,000 FTE 

students declined by almost 7 percent between 1990 and 1996. While declines in the 

total number of academic library staff have occurred only recently, over the last 20 

years increases in academic library staff seem not to have kept pace with those of the 

total staff in degree-granting postsecondary institutions. The number of professional 

staff in libraries has remained largely stable over the period between 1989 and 1996.

Academic library operating expenditures totaled over 4 billion dollars in 1996. The 

distributions of operating expenditures by category of expenditure in 1990 and 1996 

were very similar, except for increases in the proportion going to electronic-related 

services and microforms and small declines in the proportion going to salaries and 

wages and book volumes. Serial expenditures continue to dominate the distribution of 

information resources expenditures. The amount of expenditures per FTE student in 

constant 1996 dollars was slightly lower in 1996 than 22 years earlier, in 1974, but 
 49

increased since 1990 (one of the low points) by about 10 percent. Academic library 

expenditures as a percentage of total institution expenditures continue to decline, and 

have ranged between 3.9 and 2.8 percent between 1974 and 1996. These figures fall 

short of the 6 percent recommended by Association of College and Research 

Libraries (ACRL). Data suggest that there were large differences in library operating 

expenditures and staff per FTE student by Carnegie classification. For example, library 

expenditures per FTE student were $155 in Associate of Arts institutions and $781 in 

Research I and II institutions. Similarly, the number of FTE library staff per 1,000 FTE 

students was 4.4 in Associate of Arts institutions and 14.7 in Research I and II 

institutions.

These data suggest that the changes in information technology were beginning to have 

impacts on academic library statistics in areas of types of services, staff numbers, 

collection additions, and distribution of expenditures. Future surveys will provide more 

information on the continued extent of these changes.
50
R-1 

REFERENCES

Ardis, Susan. (1994). Library Without Walls: Plug and Go. Washington, DC: Special Libraries

Association.

Association of College and Research Libraries. College Libraries Section Standards Committee.

(1995, April). “Standards for College Libraries: 1995 Edition.” C & RL News. Chicago: 

Association of College and Research Libraries.

Association of College and Research Libraries. University Libraries Section University Library

Standards Review Committee. (1989, September). “Standards for University Libraries:

Evaluation of Performance.” C & RL News. Chicago: Association of College and 

Research Libraries.

Association of College and Research Libraries. Access Policy Guidelines Taskforce. (1992,

December). “ACRL Guidelines for the Preparation of Policies on Library Access.” 

C & RL News. Chicago: Association of College and Research Libraries.

Association for Educational Communications and Technology and Association of College and

Research Libraries. (1994, October). “Standards for Community, Junior, and Technical

College Learning Resource Programs.” C & RL News. Chicago: Association of College

and Research Libraries.

Association of Research Libraries. (1997, February) “ARL Libraries Purchasing Power Continues to Decline."

Association of Research Libraries. (1996). ARL Statistics 1994-95. Washington, DC.

Association of Research Libraries. (1994). ARL Statistics 1992-93. Washington, DC.

Association of Research Libraries. (1993). ARL Statistics 1991-92. Washington, DC.

Association of Research Libraries. (1992). ARL Statistics 1990-91. Washington, DC.

Battin, Patricia. (1989). “New Ways of Thinking about Financing Information Services.”

Organizing and Managing Information and Resources on Campus. Academic Computing

Publications. McKinney, Texas.

Barket, Joe. (1988). “Acquisitions and Collection Development: 2001.” Library Acquisitions:

Practice and Theory, vol. 12.

Beazley, Richard. (1979). Library Statistics of Colleges and Universities, Trends 1968-77. 
R-2

Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.

Blixrud, Julia. “University Funding for Research Libraries” http://www.arl.org/newsltr/199/eg.html.

Blixrud, Julia, and Jewell, Timothy D. “ Understanding Electronic Resources and Library Materials 

Expenditures: An Incomplete Picture.” http://www.arl.org/newsltr/197/expend.html.

Cahalan, Margaret, Justh, Natalie, and Williams, Jeffrey. (1998). Academic Libraries: 1994. 

Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics 

(NCES 98-311).

Cahalan, Margaret, Justh, Natalie, and Williams, Jeffrey. (1998). The Status of Academic Libraries in 

the United States: Results from the 1994 Academic Library Survey with Historical 

Comparisons. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education 

Statistics (NCES 98-275).

Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. (1994). “A Classification of Institutions

of Higher Education, 1994 Edition.” [Electronic data file]. Princeton, NJ.

Cravey, Pamela. (1991). Occupational Role Identity of Women Academic Librarians. College

and Research Libraries, March issue.

Cummings, A.M., Witte, M.L., Bowen, W.G., Lazarus, L.O., and Ekman, R.H. (1992).

University Libraries and Scholarly Communication. Association of Research

Libraries. Washington, DC.

DeGennaro, Richard. (1991). New Beginnings: A Report to the Faculty of Arts and Sciences on

the State of the Library. Harvard University, Boston.

Ferguson, A.W. (1992). “Collections Assessment and Acquisitions Budgets.” Journal of Library

Administration, vol. 17, no. 2: pp. 59-70.

Goudy, F.W. (1993). “Academic Libraries and the Six Percent Solution: A Twenty-Year

Financial Overview.” Journal of Academic Librarianship, vol. 19, no. 4: pp. 212-215.

Halstead, D.K. (1994). Inflation Measures for Schools, Colleges, and Libraries: 1994 Update.

Washington, DC: Research Associates of Washington.

Hernon, Peter. (1993). Statistics for Library Decision Making: A Handbook. Ablex Publishing,

Norwood, NJ.

Hughes, Carol. (1992). A Comparison of Perceptions of Campus Priorities: ‘The Logical Library
R-3

in an Organized Anarchy,’ Journal of Academic Librarianship, vol. 18, no.3.

Kyrillidou, Martha. “ARL Salary Survey 1995-96 Released.” ARL 184, February 1996.

Leonard, B.G. (1994). “The Metamorphosis of the Information Resources Budget.” Library 

Trends, vol. 42, no. 3: pp. 490-498.

Lynch, Mary Jo. (1996). Electronic Services in Academic Libraries. American Library

Association, Chicago, IL.

Maxwell, Kim. “Supply and Demand in ARL Libraries” ARL 187, August 1996.

Molz, Kathleen. (1991). The Federal Role in Support of Academic Libraries. American Library

Association.

Moran, Barbara. (1984). Academic Libraries, the Changing Knowledge Centers of Colleges and

Universities. Washington, DC: Association for the Study of Higher Education.

National Education Goals Panel. (1994). Data Volume for the National Education Goals Report,

Volume One: National Data. Washington, DC.

Neal, James. (1996). “Academic Libraries: 2000 and Beyond.” Library Journal. July issue.

Oberg, Larry. (1992). “The Emergence of the Paraprofessional in Academic Libraries:

Perceptions and Realities.” College and Research Libraries, March issue.

Park, Betsy and Riggs, Robert. (1991). “Status of the Profession: A 1989 National Survey of

Tenure and Promotion Policies for Academic Librarians.” College and Research

Libraries, May issue.

Podolsky, Arthur. Academic Libraries: 1988. U.S. Department of Education. OERI. 1990.

Roche, M.M. (1993). ARLL/RLG Interlibrary Loan Cost Study: A Joint Effort by the Association

of Research Libraries and the Research Libraries Group. Washington, DC: Association

of Research Libraries.

Rossi, Robert and Daugherty, M. Sharon. (1997). The Status of Academic Libraries in the United 

States. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education 

Statistics (NCES 97-413).

Smith, James and Alexander, Adrian. (1992). “Annual Survey of Serials Collection Assessment

Programs, Practices and Policies in Academic Libraries.” Collection Assessment and

Acquisitions Budgets. Hawthorne Press.
R-4

Stubbs, Kendon. “Service Trends Charted in Newly Released ARL Statistics.” ARL 185,

 April 1996.

Stubbs, Kendon. “Trends in University Funding for Research Libraries.” ARL 172, January 1994.

Wilder, Stanley. (1995). The Age Demographics of Academic Libraries: A Profession Apart.

Washington, DC: Association of Research Libraries.

Williams, Jeffrey. (1993). Academic Libraries: 1990. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of 

Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES 93-044).

Williams, Jeffrey. (1994). Academic Libraries: 1992. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of 

Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES 95-031).

Williams, Jeffrey. (1998). Academic Libraries: 1994. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of 

Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES 98-275).
A-1

Appendix A: Methodology

Scope

The Academic Libraries survey was mailed in August 1996 to all postsecondary institutions in the United 

States.* Among the 3,792 postsecondary degree-granting institutions in the United States that are the focus 

of this report the response rate was 95 percent. The Academic Library file and this report are limited to 

postsecondary degree-granting institutions.

Of the 3,792 postsecondary degree-granting institutions in the United States, there were 172 institutions that 

did not have their own library but shared a library with one or more of 96 other institutions. Those 172 

institutions were excluded from the survey. There were also 212 institutions that were found to be out of 

scope because they did not have an academic library as defined by the survey. Thus there were 3,408 

postsecondary degree-granting institutions of the 50 states and the District of Columbia that had academic 

libraries in 1996. The response among these 3,408 institutions was 94 percent.

An Academic Library is defined as an entity that provides all of the following:

ß organized collection of printed or other materials, or a combination thereof;

ß a staff trained to provide and interpret such materials as required to meet the informational, cultural, 

recreational, or educational needs of clientele;

ß an established schedule in which services of the staff are available to clientele; and

ß the physical facilities necessary to support such a collection, staff, and schedule. 

This definition includes libraries that are part of Learning Resource Centers. The library must be operated by 

a postsecondary degree-granting institution. 

Data Collection Procedures

The Academic Library Survey data are collected and processed by the Census Bureau for NCES. In 1990, 

an NCES/IPEDS (Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System) academic library survey improvement 

project was begun with the assistance of the National Commission on Libraries and Information Science 

(NCLIS) and the American Library Association’s Office of Research and Statistics (ALA-ORS). The 

project identified a librarian in each state to work with IPEDS Coordinators in submitting library data to 

NCES. For the 1990, 1992, 1994, and 1996 data collections, many of those library representatives took 

major responsibility for collecting data in their state. Others were available to promote prompt responses 

from librarians and to assist in problem resolution when anomalies were discovered in completed 

questionnaires.

 

* This report is based only on responses of postsecondary degree-granting institutions. The response rate among 

“other postsecondary institutions” is typically under 50 percent. 
A-2

The project also assisted NCES in developing microcomputer software packages for use by states in 

reporting library data to NCES. The software package was named Input and Data Editing for Academic 

Library Statistics (IDEALS). Academic librarians within each state completed hard copy forms as in the 

past and returned them to the state’s library representative or the IPEDS Coordinator. States were given 

the option of submitting the library forms to NCES, but were encouraged to enter those data into IDEALS 

and submit the data on diskette to NCES.

The IDEALS package features some internal consistency edit checks as well as a few range checks and 

summation checks. Library representatives at the state level could run edit/error reports and make 

corrections before submitting the data on diskette to NCES. 

Editing and Imputation

The IDEALS computer program described above includes many edit checks providing some warnings as 

the data are being keyed and provides an edit/error report after the data have been keyed. Examples of 

these edit checks are listed below:

ß Summations—reported totals are compared with the sums of the constituent data items. If they 

are not equal, an error message is generated.

ß Relational edit checks—the program compares data entries from one section of the questionnaire 

with data entries from another section of the questionnaire for consistency. For example, if books 

and bound serials were added during the fiscal year the program would expect some expenditure to 

be reported for books and bound serials. If one is reported without the other an error message is 

generated. Another example is that the number of volumes of print materials added during the fiscal 

year cannot exceed the total number of volumes held at the end of the fiscal year.

ß Range checks—For example, if the average salary of librarians is less than $20,000 or greater than 

$100,000, an error message is generated. If any of the collections data, except for volumes held at 

the end of the year, is greater than 1,000,000, an error message is generated. If the reported hours 

of service is less than 10 hours per week or greater than 168 hours per week, an error message is 

generated.

When probable errors were identified by the IDEALS edit checks, state or Census Bureau personnel 

contacted the institution to resolve the problem. 

After the data were received by NCES from every state, the data files were merged and general edits and 

imputations were performed. Some examples follow.

ß If a total was blank or zero, but there were one or more positive subtotals the total was 

changed to equal the sum of the subtotals.

ß If prior year (1994) data were available, the 1994 responses were used for imputation. A ratio 

adjustment was done, taking into account the average amount of change that occurred in the 
A-3

variable within the imputation stratum to which the institution was assigned. These ratios were 

then applied to the prior year data used for imputation. The strata were based upon the highest 

level of degree (doctor’s, master’s, bachelor’s, and associate), and control and size of 

institution. The four control/size imputation categories were: public, less than median number of 

degrees for institutions in that category; public, equal to or greater than the median; private, 

less than the median; private, equal to or greater than the median. 

ß If prior year data were unavailable, for purposes of imputation, the postsecondary file was 

divided into the 8 imputation classes noted above and averages for the class were applied.

ß To calculate the imputed value for a subtotal, the average estimate was calculated across the 

set of respondents in each class, including ones for which the total was obtained by adding the 

subtotals, but excluding those for which the sum of the subtotals did not originally equal the 

total. The average subtotal value was divided by the average total value within each imputation 

class to obtain an average proportion. The average proportion was multiplied by the reported 

total to obtain the imputed subtotal value. 

ß If for total staff (Part B, line 6 on the survey form) and total operating expenditures (Part C, 

line 19 on the survey form), the total and all subtotals were blank or zero, they were imputed 

by taking the average of the imputation class. 

ß Values were imputed for all data items in Parts B through F of the survey form, except 

contributed services staff (Part B, line 4 on the survey form) and employee fringe benefits 

(Part C, line 23 on the survey form). These categories were applicable to only a few 

institutions. Values were not imputed for electronic services (Part G). Tables B-1 - 11 and B13 reflect imputed data. Table B-12, which reports percentages, does not include imputed 

data.

The imputation procedure of using a ratio adjustment to prior year data for imputation represented a change 

from that followed in previous cycles, and may have resulted in some small differences in estimates. The 

change for 1996 to the use of ratio adjustments allowed use of information about actual changes in the data, 

which enabled more accurate imputation. While checks indicate that the effect of the change in imputation 

procedure was not large, this report uses data from institutions reporting in each reference year to make 

comparisons over time.
A-4 

Response Rates

Of the 3,408 degree granting postsecondary institutions that have academic libraries, 197 or 5.8 percent 

were complete nonrespondents. Tables A-1 to A-4 present further information on response rates. The first 

three rows of table A-1 present the number of academic libraries, and the number and percentage of 

nonrespondents and respondents by level and control of institution. In addition, the remaining rows show the 

number and percentage of libraries responding for each item.

Due to NCES standards only items that have at least a 70 percent item response rate were included in the 

comparisons over time. The comparisons over time were made using the same set of institutions in each 

year.

Classifications Used in the Report

The tables in this report present the data by state, control (public, private); level of highest offering 

(doctor’s, master’s, bachelor’s, and less than 4-year); size of FTE student enrollment (less than 1,500; 

1,500 to 4,999; 5,000 or more); and the 1994 Carnegie classification. For table presentation, “level I” and 

"level II" of the Carnegie classifications were combined. The Carnegie classification categories used are as 

follows: Research I and II; Doctoral I and II; Master’s I and II; Baccalaureate I and II; Associate of Arts; 

and Specialized. In addition, there were 316 institutions that did not have a Carnegie classification in 1994 

and these were put into a “not classified” category (Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, 

A Classification of Institutions of Higher Education, 1994 Edition, Princeton, NJ).

Caution on the analysis of data by state and by level and control of institution. Because the number 

of complete nonresponses can vary by state and affect the reliability of the state estimates, table A-2 

presents the distribution of the set of complete nonrespondents by libraries by state and by level and control 

of institution. Table A-3 gives the number of academic libraries by state, level, and control of institution. 

The data user should be especially cautious in using data at a level of detail where the nonresponse rate was 

30 percent or greater.
Table A-1.- Number and percent of responding academic libraries by item and by level and control of institu

Total

postsecondary

degreegranting

institutions

Pct responding

4-year institutions Less than 4-year 

Total 4-year

institutions Highest level of degree

Total responding Pct res- ponding T

p

Total responding Pct res- ponding Doctor’s Master’s Bachelor’s Total responding Pct res- ponding Total res- ponding Pct res- ponding Total res- ponding Pct res- ponding

All institutions ............................................. 3,408 100.0% 2,115 100.0% 538 100.0% 905 100.0% 670 100.0% 1,293 100.0% 

Non-responding libraries ...................... 197 5.8 115 5.4 31 5.8 39 4.3 45 6.7 82 6.3 Responding libraries ............................. 3,211 94.2 2,000 94.6 507 94.2 866 95.7 625 93.3 1,211 93.7 

Part B-Library staff

Librarians/professional staff ................. 3,106 91.1 1,936 91.5 490 91.1 844 93.3 600 89.6 1,170 90.5 All other paid staff ................................ 3,030 88.9 1,896 89.6 490 91.1 824 91.0 580 86.6 1,134 87.7 Contributed services staff .................... 2,713 79.6 1,709 80.8 435 80.9 733 81.0 539 80.4 1,004 77.6 Student assistants/all funding .............. 3,027 88.8 1,901 89.9 483 89.8 829 91.6 587 87.6 1,126 87.1 Total FTE staff ......................................... 2,881 84.5 1,817 85.9 467 86.8 787 87.0 561 83.7 1,064 82.3 

Part C-Library operating expenditures

Librarians/professional staff ................. 3,014 88.4 1,874 88.6 484 90.0 811 89.6 577 86.1 1,140 88.2 All other paid staff ................................ 2,889 84.8 1,803 85.2 472 87.7 783 86.5 546 81.5 1,086 84.0 Student assistants .................................. 2,933 86.1 1,860 87.9 478 88.8 815 90.1 566 84.5 1,073 83.0 Books and other print materials (info

resources) .......................................... 3,145 92.3 1,960 92.7 492 91.4 851 94.0 615 91.8 1,185 91.6 

Current serials ........................................ 3,102 91.0 1,939 91.7 488 90.7 844 93.3 605 90.3 1,163 89.9 

Microforms ............................................. 2,819 82.7 1,754 82.9 432 80.3 779 86.1 541 80.7 1,065 82.4 Audiovisual materials ........................... 2,875 84.4 1,769 83.6 432 80.3 775 85.6 561 83.7 1,106 85.5 Computer files/search services ........... 2,932 86.0 1,830 86.5 459 85.3 799 88.3 571 85.2 1,102 85.2 Document delivery/interlibrary loan .. 2,745 80.5 1,748 82.6 439 81.6 759 83.9 549 81.9 997 77.1 Other information resources ................ 2,542 74.6 1,586 75.0 413 76.8 684 75.6 487 72.7 956 73.9 Preservation ........................................... 2,835 83.2 1,821 86.1 474 88.1 792 87.5 554 82.7 1,014 78.4 Furniture and equipment ..................... 2,907 85.3 1,811 85.6 453 84.2 800 88.4 557 83.1 1,096 84.8 Computer hardware and software .... 2,944 86.4 1,834 86.7 467 86.8 809 89.4 557 83.1 1,110 85.8 Bibliographic utilities, networks,

consortia ............................................ 2,929 85.9 1,859 87.9 479 89.0 814 89.9 565 84.3 1,070 82.8 

All other operating expenditures ........ 3,039 89.2 1,915 90.5 489 90.9 836 92.4 589 87.9 1,124 86.9 Total operating expenditures .............. 2,763 81.1 1,729 81.7 439 81.6 750 82.9 539 80.4 1,034 80.0 

Part D-Library collections

Books/serials cataloged vols. added 3,100 91.0 1,933 91.4 493 91.6 838 92.6 600 89.6 1,167 90.3 Books/serials cataloged vols. eofy ..... 3,127 91.8 1,954 92.4 497 92.4 849 93.8 606 90.4 1,173 90.7 Books/serials cataloged titles added 2,802 82.2 1,700 80.4 405 75.3 755 83.4 538 80.3 1,102 85.2 Books/serials cataloged titles eofy ..... 2,774 81.4 1,680 79.4 400 74.3 748 82.7 530 79.1 1,094 84.6 Govt. documents no. of units added 2,551 74.9 1,585 74.9 415 77.1 689 76.1 479 71.5 966 74.7 Govt. documents no. of units eofy ..... 2,575 75.6 1,602 75.7 427 79.4 689 76.1 484 72.2 973 75.3 Govt. documents no. of titles added 2,289 67.2 1,338 63.3 318 59.1 584 64.5 434 64.8 951 73.5 Govt. documents no. of titles eofy ..... 2,284 67.0 1,331 62.9 317 58.9 578 63.9 434 64.8 953 73.7 Current serials paid/unpaid added ... 2,983 87.5 1,846 87.3 455 84.6 808 89.3 581 86.7 1,137 87.9 Current serials paid/unpaid eofy ........ 3,123 91.6 1,943 91.9 488 90.7 843 93.1 610 91.0 1,180 91.3 Current serials no. of titles added ....... 2,720 79.8 1,651 78.1 386 71.7 727 80.3 536 80.0 1,069 82.7 Current serials no. of titles eofy ........... 2,830 83.0 1,719 81.3 403 74.9 755 83.4 559 83.4 1,111 85.9 Microforms no. of units added ............ 2,918 85.6 1,830 86.5 473 87.9 798 88.2 557 83.1 1,088 84.1 Microforms no. of units eofy ................ 3,003 88.1 1,888 89.3 487 90.5 822 90.8 577 86.1 1,115 86.2 

NOTE: Caution should be exercised when using data at a level of detail where the response rate was less than 70 percent.NOTE: EOFY = held at End Of Fiscal YearSOURCE: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), "Acade

A-5
Table A-1.- Number and percent of responding academic libraries by item and by level and control of institution: 19

Total

postsecondary

degreegranting

institutions

Pct responding

4-year institutions Less than 4-year 

Total 4-year

institutions Highest level of degree

Total responding Pct res- ponding T

p

Total responding Pct res- ponding Doctor’s Master’s Bachelor’s Total responding Pct res- ponding Total res- ponding Pct res- ponding Total res- ponding Pct res- ponding

Part D-Library collections

Microforms no. of titles added ............ 2,466 72.4% 1,463 69.2% 345 64.1% 643 71.0% 473 70.6% 1,003 77.6% 

Microforms no. of titles eofy ................ 2,575 75.6 1,504 71.1 335 62.3 667 73.7 500 74.6 1,071 82.8 Manuscripts/archives (feet) added ... 2,595 76.1 1,623 76.7 431 80.1 692 76.5 498 74.3 972 75.2 Manuscripts/archives (feet) eofy ........ 2,722 79.9 1,718 81.2 458 85.1 725 80.1 533 79.6 1,004 77.6 Cartographic materials (units) added 2,673 78.4 1,660 78.5 432 80.3 704 77.8 522 77.9 1,013 78.3 Cartographic materials (units) eofy ... 2,765 81.1 1,710 80.9 449 83.5 725 80.1 534 79.7 1,055 81.6 Graphic materials (no. units) added .. 2,654 77.9 1,631 77.1 432 80.3 689 76.1 508 75.8 1,023 79.1 Graphic materials (no. units) eofy ...... 2,735 80.3 1,678 79.3 443 82.3 718 79.3 515 76.9 1,057 81.7 Sound recordings (no. units) added .. 2,852 83.7 1,783 84.3 454 84.4 775 85.6 552 82.4 1,069 82.7 Sound recordings (no. units) eofy ....... 2,945 86.4 1,837 86.9 462 85.9 796 88.0 577 86.1 1,108 85.7 Sound recordings (no. titles) added .. 2,626 77.1 1,594 75.4 369 68.6 697 77.0 526 78.5 1,032 79.8 Sound recordings (no. titles) eofy ....... 2,647 77.7 1,592 75.3 368 68.4 690 76.2 532 79.4 1,055 81.6 Film/video materials units added ....... 2,947 86.5 1,824 86.2 455 84.6 799 88.3 568 84.8 1,123 86.9 Film/video materials units eofy ............ 3,015 88.5 1,866 88.2 465 86.4 810 89.5 589 87.9 1,149 88.9 Film/video materials titles added ....... 2,712 79.6 1,637 77.4 376 69.9 721 79.7 538 80.3 1,075 83.1 Film/video materials titles eofy ............ 2,720 79.8 1,641 77.6 377 70.1 710 78.5 552 82.4 1,079 83.4 Computer files no. of units added ...... 2,849 83.6 1,744 82.5 441 82.0 754 83.3 547 81.6 1,105 85.5 Computer files no. of units eofy .......... 2,922 85.7 1,801 85.2 453 84.2 779 86.1 567 84.6 1,121 86.7 Computer files no. of titles added ...... 2,686 78.8 1,603 75.8 378 70.3 714 78.9 509 76.0 1,083 83.8 Computer files no. of titles eofy .......... 2,729 80.1 1,643 77.7 383 71.2 741 81.9 517 77.2 1,086 84.0 Other library materials units added .... 2,495 73.2 1,530 72.3 387 71.9 668 73.8 473 70.6 965 74.6 Other library materials units eofy ........ 2,581 75.7 1,583 74.8 402 74.7 691 76.4 488 72.8 998 77.2 

Part E-Library services, fiscal year

Circulation trans. general .................... 3,137 92.0 1,957 92.5 492 91.4 853 94.3 610 91.0 1,180 91.3 Circulation trans. reserve ..................... 2,909 85.4 1,810 85.6 458 85.1 779 86.1 572 85.4 1,099 85.0 Inter-loans provided to ........................ 2,901 85.1 1,831 86.6 453 84.2 799 88.3 579 86.4 1,070 82.8 Inter-loans received from .................... 2,964 87.0 1,856 87.8 458 85.1 814 89.9 583 87.0 1,108 85.7 Info serv. no. of presentations ............. 3,053 89.6 1,899 89.8 475 88.3 828 91.5 594 88.7 1,154 89.2 Info serv. no. of persons ....................... 2,991 87.8 1,855 87.7 471 87.5 805 89.0 577 86.1 1,136 87.9 

Part F-Library service per typical week

Public service hours .............................. 3,101 91.0 1,937 91.6 482 89.6 844 93.3 609 90.9 1,164 90.0 Gate count ........................................... 2,658 78.0 1,609 76.1 404 75.1 708 78.2 496 74.0 1,049 81.1 Reference transactions ........................ 2,795 82.0 1,731 81.8 446 82.9 755 83.4 529 79.0 1,064 82.3 

Part G-Electronic services

Electronic catalog that includes

library’s holdings

Access from within library ................ 3,172 93.1 1,977 93.5 505 93.9 857 94.7 613 91.5 1,195 92.4 Access from elsewhere on campus 2,946 86.4 1,852 87.6 489 90.9 806 89.1 555 82.8 1,094 84.6 Access off campus by primary

clientele ......................................... 2,891 84.8 1,820 86.1 487 90.5 793 87.6 538 80.3 1,071 82.8 

Access off campus by others .......... 2,857 83.8 1,802 85.2 484 90.0 785 86.7 531 79.3 1,055 81.6 

NOTE: Caution should be exercised when using data at a level of detail where the response rate was less than 70 percent.NOTE: EOFY = held at End Of Fiscal YearSOURCE: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), "Acade

A-6
Table A-1.- Number and percent of responding academic libraries by item and by level and control of institution: 19

Total

postsecondary

degreegranting

institutions

Pct responding

4-year institutions Less than 4-year 

Total 4-year

institutions Highest level of degree

Total responding Pct res- ponding T

p

Total responding Pct res- ponding Doctor’s Master’s Bachelor’s Total responding Pct res- ponding Total res- ponding Pct res- ponding Total res- ponding Pct res- ponding

Part G-Electronic services

Electronic indexes and reference

tools

Access from within library ................ 3,172 93.1% 1,974 93.3% 505 93.9% 853 94.3% 614 91.6% 1,198 92.7% 

Access from elsewhere on campus 2,907 85.3 1,830 86.5 484 90.0 797 88.1 547 81.6 1,077 83.3 Access off campus by primary

clientele ......................................... 2,851 83.7 1,791 84.7 481 89.4 781 86.3 527 78.7 1,060 82.0 

Access off campus by others .......... 2,782 81.6 1,746 82.6 465 86.4 762 84.2 517 77.2 1,036 80.1 

Electronic full text periodicals

Access from within library ................ 3,161 92.8 1,965 92.9 502 93.3 849 93.8 612 91.3 1,196 92.5 Access from elsewhere on campus 2,907 85.3 1,830 86.5 484 90.0 797 88.1 547 81.6 1,077 83.3 Access off campus by primary

clientele ......................................... 2,851 83.7 1,791 84.7 481 89.4 781 86.3 527 78.7 1,060 82.0 

Access off campus by others .......... 2,782 81.6 1,746 82.6 465 86.4 762 84.2 517 77.2 1,036 80.1 

Electronic full text course reserves

Access from within library ................ 3,115 91.4 1,938 91.6 495 92.0 842 93.0 599 89.4 1,177 91.0 Access from elsewhere on campus 2,857 83.8 1,786 84.4 470 87.4 789 87.2 525 78.4 1,071 82.8 Access off campus by primary

clientele ......................................... 2,781 81.6 1,742 82.4 468 87.0 756 83.5 516 77.0 1,039 80.4 

Access off campus by others .......... 2,751 80.7 1,725 81.6 462 85.9 756 83.5 505 75.4 1,026 79.4 

Electronic files other than catalog

Access from within library ................ 3,132 91.9 1,948 92.1 499 92.8 840 92.8 607 90.6 1,184 91.6 Access from elsewhere on campus 2,861 83.9 1,789 84.6 472 87.7 786 86.9 529 79.0 1,072 82.9 Access off campus by primary

clientele ......................................... 2,795 82.0 1,756 83.0 469 87.2 766 84.6 519 77.5 1,039 80.4 

Access off campus by others .......... 2,767 81.2 1,737 82.1 467 86.8 758 83.8 510 76.1 1,030 79.7 

Internet access

Access from within library ................ 3,170 93.0 1,975 93.4 504 93.7 854 94.4 615 91.8 1,195 92.4 Access from elsewhere on campus 2,941 86.3 1,839 87.0 479 89.0 807 89.2 551 82.2 1,102 85.2 Access off campus by primary

clientele ......................................... 2,842 83.4 1,785 84.4 472 87.7 779 86.1 532 79.4 1,057 81.7 

Access off campus by others .......... 2,752 80.8 1,719 81.3 454 84.4 754 83.3 509 76.0 1,033 79.9 

Library reference service by e-mail

Access from within library ................ 3,132 91.9 1,952 92.3 500 92.9 844 93.3 606 90.4 1,180 91.3 Access from elsewhere on campus 2,890 84.8 1,815 85.8 480 89.2 793 87.6 540 80.6 1,075 83.1 Access off campus by primary

clientele ......................................... 2,824 82.9 1,775 83.9 474 88.1 774 85.5 525 78.4 1,049 81.1 

Access off campus by others .......... 2,762 81.0 1,731 81.8 457 84.9 759 83.9 513 76.6 1,031 79.7 

Capacity to place interlibrary

loan/doc deliv requestselectronically

Access from within library ................ 3,147 92.3 1,959 92.6 503 93.5 843 93.1 611 91.2 1,188 91.9 Access from elsewhere on campus 2,883 84.6 1,807 85.4 481 89.4 788 87.1 536 80.0 1,076 83.2 Access off campus by primary

clientele ......................................... 2,818 82.7 1,763 83.4 473 87.9 765 84.5 523 78.1 1,055 81.6 

NOTE: Caution should be exercised when using data at a level of detail where the response rate was less than 70 percent.NOTE: EOFY = held at End Of Fiscal YearSOURCE: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), "Acade

A-7
Table A-1.- Number and percent of responding academic libraries by item and by level and control of institution: 19

Total

postsecondary

degreegranting

institutions

Pct responding

4-year institutions Less than 4-year 

Total 4-year

institutions Highest level of degree

Total responding Pct res- ponding T

p

Total responding Pct res- ponding Doctor’s Master’s Bachelor’s Total responding Pct res- ponding Total res- ponding Pct res- ponding Total res- ponding Pct res- ponding

Part G-Electronic services

Capacity to place interlibrary

loan/doc deliv requestselectronically

Access off campus by others .......... 2,772 81.3% 1,737 82.1% 466 86.6% 756 83.5% 513 76.6% 1,035 80.0% 

Electronic document delivery by the

library to patron’saccount/address .............................. 3,140 92.1 1,948 92.1 496 92.2 841 92.9 609 90.9 1,192 92.2 

Computers not dedicated to library

functions for patron use insidelibrary .................................................. 3,170 93.0 1,972 93.2 503 93.5 852 94.1 615 91.8 1,198 92.7 

Computer software for patron use

inside the library ................................ 3,166 92.9 1,972 93.2 502 93.3 856 94.6 612 91.3 1,194 92.3 

Technology in the library to assist

patrons with disabilities .................... 3,162 92.8 1,964 92.9 503 93.5 852 94.1 607 90.6 1,198 92.7 

Instruction by library staff on use of

internet resources ............................. 3,176 93.2 1,974 93.3 504 93.7 854 94.4 614 91.6 1,202 93.0 

NOTE: Caution should be exercised when using data at a level of detail where the response rate was less than 70 percent.NOTE: EOFY = held at End Of Fiscal YearSOURCE: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), "Acade

A-8
Table A-2.- Number and percent of non-responding academic libraries by state, level and control of institution

Total

postsecondary

degreegranting

institutions

Pct

4-year institutions Less than 4-year 

Total 4-year

institutions Highest level of degree

Total Pct Tota

Total Pct

Doctor’s Master’s Bachelor’s

Total Pct Total Pct Total Pct

Libraries with all items imputed 197 5.8% 115 5.4% 31 5.8% 39 4.3% 45 6.7% 82 6.3% 4Alabama .................................... 1 1.5 1 2.9 0 .0 0 .0 1 8.3 0 .0 Alaska .......................................... 0 .0 0 .0 0 0 0 .0 0 0 0 0 Arizona ........................................ 0 .0 0 .0 0 0 0 .0 0 0 0 .0 Arkansas ...................................... 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .0 California .................................... 35 11.0 26 14.8 7 14.9 15 16.7 4 10.5 9 6.4 Colorado .................................... 1 2.0 1 3.0 0 .0 1 11.1 0 0 0 .0 Connecticut ............................... 0 .0 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 .0 0 0 Delaware .................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 District of Columbia ................... 1 5.3 1 5.3 0 .0 1 9.1 0 0 0 0 Florida .......................................... 6 5.8 2 3.0 1 6.2 0 .0 1 3.3 4 10.5 Georgia ....................................... 12 12.1 4 7.4 2 14.3 1 4 1 6 8 17.8 Hawaii ......................................... 0 .0 0 .0 0 .0 0 0 0 .0 0 0 Idaho ........................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Illinois ........................................... 10 6.1 8 7.6 2 6.2 1 3 5 11.6 2 3.4 Indiana ........................................ 2 2.9 2 4.0 0 0 1 4.3 1 6.2 0 0 Iowa ............................................ 2 3.4 2 5.0 1 17 0 0 1 5.0 0 .0 Kansas ......................................... 0 .0 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 .0 0 0 Kentucky ..................................... 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .0 Louisiana ..................................... 1 3 1 4 0 0 1 9 0 0 0 0 Maine .......................................... 0 .0 0 .0 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 .0 Maryland .................................... 2 3.5 2 5.9 0 .0 0 .0 2 40 0 0 Massachusetts ............................ 0 .0 0 .0 0 .0 0 .0 0 0 0 0 Michigan ..................................... 7 6.7 4 5.8 1 8 0 .0 3 9.1 3 8.6 Minnesota ................................... 7 7.3 2 4.3 0 .0 1 5 1 5.6 5 10.2 Mississippi .................................... 0 .0 0 .0 0 0 0 .0 0 0 0 .0 Missouri ........................................ 1 1.1 0 .0 0 .0 0 .0 0 .0 1 3.8 Montana ..................................... 4 17.4 1 9.1 0 0 0 .0 1 20 3 25 Nebraska .................................... 1 3.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 12.5 Nevada ....................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 New Hampshire .......................... 4 14 3 18 0 0 2 25 1 17 1 9 New Jersey ................................. 10 18.2 6 20.7 5 45 1 5.9 0 0 4 15 New Mexico ............................... 0 .0 0 .0 0 0 0 .0 0 0 0 0 New York ..................................... 15 5.9 10 6.0 2 4.3 2 2.4 6 16.2 5 5.7 North Carolina ............................ 1 .8 1 1.7 1 7 0 0 0 .0 0 0 North Dakota .............................. 5 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 50 Ohio ............................................. 23 16.8 14 15.9 5 23.8 5 13.5 4 13.3 9 18 1Oklahoma ................................... 3 6.7 1 3.8 0 .0 0 .0 1 20 2 10.5 Oregon ........................................ 4 8.3 3 9 2 25 1 6 0 0 1 6.7 Pennsylvania .............................. 8 4.0 2 1.4 0 .0 1 1.5 1 2.0 6 10.7 Rhode Island .............................. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 South Carolina ........................... 2 3.2 1 2.8 0 0 0 0 1 7 1 4 South Dakota ............................. 0 .0 0 .0 0 0 0 .0 0 0 0 0 Tennessee ................................... 5 6.6 3 5.6 1 7 0 .0 2 12.5 2 9.1 Texas ............................................ 8 4.7 4 4.1 0 0 0 .0 4 18 4 5.3 Utah ............................................. 2 13.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 28.6 Vermont ...................................... 5 23.8 5 27.8 0 0 3 25.0 2 50 0 0 Virginia ........................................ 5 6.1 4 7.8 1 6.2 2 12 1 5 1 3.2 Washington ................................ 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 West Virginia ............................... 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 25 Wisconsin .................................... 2 3.3 1 2.4 0 .0 0 0 1 12.5 1 5.0 Wyoming ..................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

SOURCE: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), "Ac

A-9
Table A-3.- Total number of academic libraries by state, level, and control of institution: 1996

Total

postsecondary

degreegranting

institutions

4-year institutions

Less than

4-year Pub

Total 4-year

institutions

Highest level of degree

Doctor’s Master’s Bachelor’s

Libraries .............................................. 3,408 2,115 538 905 670 1,293 Alabama ............................................ 68 35 9 14 12 33 Alaska ................................................. 6 5 1 2 2 1 Arizona ............................................... 41 19 3 7 9 22 Arkansas ............................................. 44 20 4 8 8 24 California ............................................ 317 176 47 90 38 141 Colorado ............................................ 51 33 12 9 12 18 Connecticut ...................................... 44 25 8 13 4 19 Delaware ........................................... 9 6 2 4 0 3 District of Columbia .......................... 19 19 7 11 1 0 Florida ................................................. 104 66 16 20 30 38 Georgia .............................................. 99 54 14 24 16 45 Hawaii ................................................. 16 9 3 3 3 7 Idaho .................................................. 11 7 3 2 2 4 Illinois ................................................... 164 105 32 30 43 59 Indiana ............................................... 69 50 11 23 16 19 Iowa .................................................... 59 40 6 14 20 19 Kansas ................................................ 52 29 5 11 13 23 Kentucky ............................................ 45 37 7 16 14 8 Louisiana ............................................ 32 24 10 11 3 8 Maine ................................................. 31 20 3 6 11 11 Maryland ............................................ 57 34 9 20 5 23 Massachusetts ................................... 116 90 27 36 27 26 Michigan ............................................ 104 69 12 24 33 35 Minnesota .......................................... 96 47 7 22 18 49 Mississippi ............................................ 40 21 7 7 7 19 Missouri ............................................... 89 63 13 23 27 26 Montana ............................................ 23 11 2 4 5 12 Nebraska ............................................ 30 22 4 10 8 8 Nevada .............................................. 9 4 2 0 2 5 New Hampshire ................................. 28 17 3 8 6 11 New Jersey ......................................... 55 29 11 17 1 26 New Mexico ....................................... 32 13 3 9 1 19 New York ............................................ 255 168 47 84 37 87 North Carolina ................................... 120 58 14 20 24 62 North Dakota ..................................... 20 10 2 2 6 10 Ohio .................................................... 137 88 21 37 30 49 Oklahoma .......................................... 45 26 6 15 5 19 Oregon ............................................... 48 33 8 17 8 15 Pennsylvania ...................................... 202 146 31 65 49 56 Rhode Island ...................................... 12 11 6 3 2 1 South Carolina ................................... 62 36 8 13 15 26 South Dakota ..................................... 20 18 4 9 5 2 Tennessee .......................................... 76 54 14 24 16 22 Texas ................................................... 172 97 40 35 22 75 Utah .................................................... 15 8 3 3 2 7 Vermont ............................................. 21 18 2 12 4 3 Virginia ................................................ 82 51 16 16 19 31 Washington ........................................ 64 29 5 16 8 35 West Virginia ...................................... 27 23 2 8 13 4 Wisconsin ............................................ 61 41 5 28 8 20 Wyoming ............................................ 9 1 1 0 0 8 

SOURCE: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPSurvey, 1996."

A-10
A-11

Table A-4.—Full-time-equivalent (FTE) enrollment and Education and General (E&G)

expenditures in postsecondary degree-granting institutions having academic 

libraries, by control of institution and Carnegie Classification: 50 states and 

District of Columbia, 1990 and 1996 

Full-time-equivalent enrollment Education and General (E&G) 

Expenditures

Institutional 

characteristics

Number Percent 

distribution

Percent 

change 

1990-96

Amount in 

millions

Percent 

distribution

Percent 

change 

1990-96 in 

constant 

dollars

Total.......................... 9,974,242 100.0% 6.1% $154,855 100.0% 19.6%

 Public ...................... 7,523,867 75.4 5.1 97,107 62.7 15.2

 Private..................... 2,450,374 24.6 9.3 57,748 37.3 29.4

Research I and II ...... 2,278,757 22.8 1.1 62,142 40.1 15.9

 Public ...................... 1,814,684 18.2 0.4 40,203 26.0 12.0

 Private..................... 464,073 4.7 3.9 21,939 14.2 25.0

Doctoral I and II........ 985,056 9.9 2.7 15,284 9.9 22.4

 Public ...................... 730,514 7.3 2.4 9,380 6.1 14.7

 Private..................... 254,542 2.6 3.5 5,905 3.8 41.7

Master's I and II ....... 2,356,924 23.6 5.9 26,490 17.1 16.8

 Public ...................... 1,742,318 17.5 4.3 17,241 11.1 11.2

 Private..................... 614,606 6.2 10.5 9,249 6.0 29.8

Baccalaureate I and II 816,795 8.2 11.7 12,765 8.2 25.8

 Public ...................... 179,971 1.8 9.1 1,714 1.1 18.1

 Private..................... 636,824 6.4 12.5 11,051 7.1 27.0

Associate of Arts ....... 3,001,149 30.1 9.0 22,748 14.7 21.5

 Public ...................... 2,844,689 28.5 9.0 19,998 12.9 21.0

 Private..................... 156,460 1.6 9.9 2,751 1.8 34.0

Specialized................. 369,706 3.7 14.6 13,011 8.4 29.5

 Public ...................... 107,376 1.1 12.6 6,698 4.3 24.6

 Private..................... 262,330 2.6 15.4 6,312 4.1 37.6

Not Classified............ 165,855 1.7 6.6 2,414 1.6 25.8

NOTE: FTE enrollment and E&G expenditures are only for those postsecondary degree-granting institutions (3,408) 

having academic libraries. Calculations of percent change include only those institutions completing the library survey in 

both 1996 and 1990. FTE enrollment is calculated by taking one-third of part-time enrollment and adding the amount to 

full-time enrollment. Constant dollars calculated based on consumer price index as published in 1996 US Statistical 

Abstract, table 745. Details may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Integrated 

Postsecondary Data Systems (IPEDS); "Academic Library Survey, 1990 and 1996," and "Fall Enrollment Survey, 1995" 

and "Finance Survey 1996." 
B-1

Appendix B: Detailed Tables
Table B-1.- Total circulation and interlibrary loan transactions in academic libraries by control, level, size, 

Carnegie Classification of institution: 1996

Institutional characteristic

Total

number of

libraries

Circulation Interlibrary 

General collection Reserve collection Loans provided to other libraries 

All postsecondary degree-granting

institutions ......................................... 3,408 186,544,558 44,188,834 9,430,907 

Control

Public ............................................ 1,573 128,732,000 28,361,960 6,313,533 Private ........................................... 1,835 57,812,558 15,826,874 3,117,374 

Level 1

Total 4-year and above .............. 2,115 160,516,886 37,317,318 8,756,400 

Doctor’s .................................... 538 110,358,495 24,097,646 6,129,983 Master’s .................................... 905 38,736,227 9,717,080 2,005,843 Bachelor’s ................................. 670 11,403,894 3,502,445 619,403 

Less than 4-year ........................... 1,293 26,027,672 6,871,516 674,507 

Size (FTE enrollment)

Less than 1,500 ............................. 1,839 25,282,367 6,312,556 1,195,514 1,500 to 4,999 ............................... 1,011 39,165,064 10,442,027 2,173,388 5,000 or more ............................... 558 122,097,127 27,434,251 6,062,005 

Carnegie classification (1994) 1

Research I and II .......................... 125 73,739,116 15,022,962 3,585,286 Doctoral I and II ........................... 110 18,302,979 4,757,429 1,279,733 Master’s I and II ............................ 518 36,251,740 8,806,739 1,970,457 Baccalaureate I and II ................ 599 16,316,603 5,032,066 960,405 Associate of Arts .......................... 1,182 24,373,778 6,778,084 646,204 Specialized ................................... 558 13,135,083 2,869,920 837,845 Not classified ................................ 316 4,425,259 921,634 150,977 

 1 While ’level’ and ’Carnegie classification’ are similar, there is not complete overlap in the two classifications. ’Level’ refers to the highest level of any degree 

The ’Carnegie classification’ is based on criteria such as institution mission and research funding in addition to highest level of degree awarded. The Carnegideveloped by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching and published in A Classification of Institutions of Higher Education, 1994 Edition.SOURCE: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), "

B-2
Table B-2.- Public service hours per typical week and number of libraries by category of public service hours p

week in academic libraries by control, level, size, and Carnegie Classification of institution: 1996

Institutional characteristic

Total

number of

libraries

Public service hours per typical week

Total Less than 20 20 to 39 40 to 59 60 to 79 80 to 99 

All postsecondary degree-granting

institutions ........................................... 3,408 258,651 28 72 466 1,490 957 

Control

Public .............................................. 1,573 119,398 5 7 168 857 385 Private ............................................ 1,835 139,253 23 65 298 633 572 

Level 1

Total 4-year and above ............... 2,115 176,108 12 24 170 650 895 

Doctor’s ...................................... 538 49,588 2 6 19 99 229 Master’s ...................................... 905 75,452 4 10 60 251 470 Bachelor’s ................................... 670 50,947 6 8 90 299 196 

Less than 4-year ............................. 1,293 82,543 16 48 296 840 62 

Size (FTE enrollment)

Less than 1,500 ............................... 1,839 126,107 25 68 394 867 391 1,500 to 4,999 ................................. 1,011 81,639 3 4 58 465 347 5,000 or more ................................. 558 50,905 0 0 14 158 219 

Carnegie classification (1994) 1

Research I and II ............................ 125 13,373 0 1 1 1 32 Doctoral I and II ............................. 110 10,665 0 1 1 8 58 Master’s I and II ............................. 518 46,342 0 0 6 89 351 Baccalaureate I and II ................. 599 51,533 0 3 13 192 293 Associate of Arts ............................ 1,182 77,403 12 36 221 813 69 Specialized ..................................... 558 40,653 7 15 95 248 137 Not classified .................................. 316 18,682 9 16 129 139 17 

 1 While ’level’ and ’Carnegie classification’ are similar, there is not complete overlap in the two classifications. ’Level’ refers to the highest level of any degree 

The ’Carnegie classification’ is based on criteria such as institution mission and research funding in addition to highest level of degree awarded. The Carnegdeveloped by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching and published in A Classification of Institutions of Higher Education, 1994 Edition.SOURCE: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), 

B-3
Table B-3.- Gate count and number of reference transactions per typical week, and total information serv

groups, in academic libraries by control, level, size, and Carnegie Classification of institution: 1996

Institutional characteristic

Total

number of

libraries

Gate count

per typical week

Reference transactions,

including computer searches

per typical week

Information service to gro

Total number of presentations 

All postsecondary degree-granting

institutions ......................................... 3,408 16,455,549 1,870,739 406,778 

Control

Public ............................................ 1,573 11,206,119 1,314,731 278,638 Private ........................................... 1,835 5,249,430 556,008 128,140 

Level 1

Total 4-year and above .............. 2,115 12,795,821 1,420,468 282,034 

Doctor’s .................................... 538 7,531,582 890,076 155,538 Master’s .................................... 905 3,878,940 389,343 91,348 Bachelor’s ................................. 670 1,383,006 140,694 35,118 

Less than 4-year ........................... 1,293 3,659,728 450,271 124,744 

Size (FTE enrollment)

Less than 1,500 ............................. 1,839 2,728,992 322,229 75,403 1,500 to 4,999 ............................... 1,011 4,434,076 452,165 116,417 5,000 or more ............................... 558 9,292,481 1,096,345 214,958 

Carnegie classification (1994) 1

Research I and II .......................... 125 4,151,669 485,419 82,870 Doctoral I and II ........................... 110 1,538,598 209,003 35,642 Master’s I and II ............................ 518 3,775,454 396,821 84,227 Baccalaureate I and II ................ 599 1,823,493 150,910 41,180 Associate of Arts .......................... 1,182 3,537,713 438,930 121,223 Specialized ................................... 558 1,235,017 119,974 26,933 Not classified ................................ 316 393,605 69,682 14,703 

 1 While ’level’ and ’Carnegie classification’ are similar, there is not complete overlap in the two classifications. ’Level’ refers to the highest level of any degree 

The ’Carnegie classification’ is based on criteria such as institution mission and research funding in addition to highest level of degree awarded. The Carnegideveloped by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching and published in A Classification of Institutions of Higher Education, 1994 Edition.SOURCE: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), "

B-4
Table B-4.- Number of volumes of books, bound serials, and bound government documents held at the end of the yea

libraries by number of volumes by control, level, size, and Carnegie Classification of institution: 1996

Institutional characteristic

Total

number of

libraries

Volumes held

at end

of year

Number of libraries in volume category

Less than

5,000

5,000 to

9,999

10,000 to

19,999

20,000 to

29,999

30,000 to

49,999

50,000 to

99,999

100,000 to

249,999

250

49

All postsecondary degree-granting

institutions ......................................... 3,408 806,717,207 320 158 213 241 450 691 747 

Control

Public ............................................ 1,573 469,863,888 43 57 77 145 297 362 231 Private ........................................... 1,835 336,853,319 277 101 136 96 153 329 516 

Level 1

Total 4-year and above .............. 2,115 753,862,302 115 48 90 89 155 361 673 

Doctor’s ..................................... 538 517,545,197 12 6 8 5 14 35 131 Master’s ..................................... 905 175,152,602 35 19 24 22 39 177 378 Bachelor’s ................................. 670 61,076,696 68 23 58 61 102 148 164 

Less than 4-year ........................... 1,293 52,854,905 205 110 123 152 295 330 74 

Size (FTE enrollment)

Less than 1,500 ............................. 1,839 112,481,064 309 138 186 193 257 352 363 1,500 to 4,999 ............................... 1,011 156,309,326 9 20 26 47 185 249 297 5,000 or more ............................... 558 537,926,817 2 0 1 1 8 90 87 

Carnegie classification (1994) 1

Research I and II .......................... 125 352,060,127 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Doctoral I and II ........................... 110 89,203,834 1 0 0 0 0 0 10 Master’s I and II ............................ 518 161,988,226 1 0 3 4 3 47 211 Baccalaureate I and II ................ 599 98,133,980 1 5 5 6 26 178 292 Associate of Arts .......................... 1,182 52,372,106 150 75 85 150 317 328 74 Specialized ................................... 558 43,081,619 50 33 67 60 82 116 126 Not classified ................................ 316 9,877,315 117 45 53 21 22 22 33 

 1 While ’level’ and ’Carnegie classification’ are similar, there is not complete overlap in the two classifications. ’Level’ refers to the highest level of any degree 

The ’Carnegie classification’ is based on criteria such as institution mission and research funding in addition to highest level of degree awarded. The Carnegie developed by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching and published in A Classification of Institutions of Higher Education, 1994 Edition.SOURCE: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), "A

B-5
Table B-5.- Number of units and linear feet held at the end of the year and number of volumes, units, and linear feet add

by material collection category, in academic libraries by control, level, size, and Carnegie Classification of inst

Institutional characteristic

Total

number of

libraries

Number held at the end of the year Number added during 

Physical units

of microforms

Manuscripts

and archives

in linear feet

Cartographic

materials units

Graphic

materials units

Books and

bound serials

volumes

Physical units

of microforms

Manuscripts

and archives

linear feet

All postsecondary degree-granting

institutions ........................................... 3,408 1,015,714,047 4,310,700 33,879,852 95,860,437 21,346,078 38,172,955 223,131 

Control

Public ............................................... 1,573 697,747,082 2,491,931 26,388,683 68,396,912 12,758,101 22,755,467 110,782 Private ............................................. 1,835 317,966,965 1,818,769 7,491,169 27,463,525 8,587,977 15,417,488 112,349 

Level 1

Total 4-year and above ................ 2,115 971,527,449 4,180,961 33,603,085 92,376,480 19,371,834 35,940,374 217,637 

Doctor’s ....................................... 538 651,660,202 3,035,392 29,300,258 80,556,839 13,057,752 21,231,259 155,663 Master’s ....................................... 905 287,024,715 861,434 3,506,648 8,792,286 4,631,815 12,523,020 44,118 Bachelor’s ................................... 670 32,842,532 283,989 796,179 3,027,355 1,680,389 2,186,095 17,735 

Less than 4-year ............................. 1,293 44,186,598 129,739 276,767 3,483,957 1,974,244 2,232,581 5,494 

Size (FTE enrollment)

Less than 1,500 ............................... 1,839 80,204,611 653,369 928,644 7,267,796 3,279,195 4,675,441 42,372 1,500 to 4,999 .................................. 1,011 215,946,068 621,658 2,973,992 8,569,344 4,431,502 10,175,857 30,687 5,000 or more .................................. 558 719,563,368 3,035,673 29,977,216 80,023,297 13,635,381 23,321,657 150,072 

Carnegie classification (1994) 1

Research I and II ............................ 125 408,648,031 2,214,205 22,082,787 65,177,411 8,306,698 12,024,746 118,295 Doctoral I and II ............................. 110 146,521,773 490,468 5,308,330 11,467,513 2,657,387 5,193,057 20,495 Master’s I and II .............................. 518 310,086,857 769,011 4,329,338 6,184,654 4,212,721 12,390,944 30,306 Baccalaureate I and II .................. 599 65,719,356 415,604 1,437,008 3,255,036 2,559,481 4,430,813 19,246 Associate of Arts ............................ 1,182 42,958,771 128,058 255,096 3,502,834 1,911,097 2,218,800 4,538 Specialized ..................................... 558 33,042,218 250,516 390,359 5,740,256 1,296,411 1,418,176 27,474 Not classified .................................. 316 8,737,041 42,838 76,934 532,733 402,283 496,419 2,777 

 1 While ’level’ and ’Carnegie classification’ are similar, there is not complete overlap in the two classifications. ’Level’ refers to the highest level of any degree 

The ’Carnegie classification’ is based on criteria such as institution mission and research funding in addition to highest level of degree awarded. The Carnegdeveloped by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching and published in A Classification of Institutions of Higher Education, 1994 Edition.SOURCE: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), 

B-6
Table B-6.- Number of unduplicated titles held at the end of the year in academic libraries by material coll

category, and by control, level, size, and Carnegie Classification of institution: 1996

Institutional characteristic

Total

number of

libraries

Books and

bound serials

Government

documents

not elsewhere

classified

Current serial

subscriptions Microforms Sound recordings 2 Fil

video 

All postsecondary degree-granting

institutions ............................................. 3,408 449,178,927 67,313,520 5,708,762 181,203,010 9,206,407 3

Control

Public ................................................ 1,573 260,124,607 52,459,571 3,103,593 124,466,690 4,907,436 2Private ............................................... 1,835 189,054,320 14,853,949 2,605,169 56,736,320 4,298,971 1

Level 1

Total 4-year and above .................. 2,115 405,179,686 65,590,567 5,216,492 177,152,350 8,002,142 2

Doctor’s ........................................ 538 241,833,138 39,358,293 3,623,873 97,369,914 4,519,089 1Master’s ........................................ 905 118,172,798 22,485,351 1,203,406 72,341,589 2,455,987 1Bachelor’s ..................................... 670 45,118,627 3,746,923 388,388 7,437,733 1,025,417 

Less than 4-year ............................... 1,293 43,999,241 1,722,953 492,270 4,050,660 1,204,265 1

Size (FTE enrollment)

Less than 1,500 ................................. 1,839 84,439,736 5,892,851 999,065 21,703,156 2,323,405 11,500 to 4,999 ................................... 1,011 108,723,032 16,807,021 1,133,969 53,636,991 2,414,555 15,000 or more ................................... 558 256,016,159 44,613,648 3,575,728 105,862,863 4,468,447 1

Carnegie classification (1994) 1

Research I and II .............................. 125 140,875,936 16,065,353 2,008,820 43,840,348 2,106,663 Doctoral I and II ............................... 110 53,706,766 12,218,113 998,028 21,631,811 1,187,958 Master’s I and II ................................ 518 106,547,380 28,020,369 1,075,192 85,629,311 2,129,444 Baccalaureate I and II .................... 599 69,778,026 6,416,372 616,846 16,518,713 1,592,736 Associate of Arts .............................. 1,182 43,533,176 1,713,380 472,045 3,942,835 1,172,546 1Specialized ....................................... 558 28,046,641 2,486,859 433,966 8,172,619 851,878 Not classified .................................... 316 6,691,002 393,074 103,865 1,467,373 165,182 

 1 While ’level’ and ’Carnegie classification’ are similar, there is not complete overlap in the two classifications. ’Level’ refers to the highest level of any degree 

The ’Carnegie classification’ is based on criteria such as institution mission and research funding in addition to highest level of degree awarded. The Carnegdeveloped by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching and published in A Classification of Institutions of Higher Education, 1994 Edition.

 2 ’Sound recordings’ was previously labeled ’Audio materials,’ and ’Computer files’ was previously labeled ’Machine readable materials.’

SOURCE: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), 

B-7
Table B-7.- Number of unduplicated titles added during the year by material collection category, and by c

level, size, and Carnegie Classification of institution: 1996

Institutional characteristic

Total

number of

libraries

Books and

bound serials

Government

documents

not elsewhere

classified

Current serial

subscriptions Microforms Sound recordings 2 Fil

video 

All postsecondary degree-granting

institutions ............................................. 3,408 12,332,877 2,744,646 274,118 7,331,345 337,259 

Control

Public ................................................ 1,573 7,402,308 1,925,227 121,999 4,614,208 180,944 Private ............................................... 1,835 4,930,569 819,419 152,119 2,717,137 156,315 

Level 1

Total 4-year and above .................. 2,115 10,890,843 2,562,597 239,869 7,125,281 306,596 

Doctor’s ........................................ 538 6,732,673 1,304,045 99,152 3,506,445 176,061 Master’s ........................................ 905 2,896,372 1,090,485 118,344 3,234,292 83,090 Bachelor’s ..................................... 670 1,260,757 168,067 22,373 384,521 47,220 

Less than 4-year ............................... 1,293 1,442,034 182,049 34,249 206,064 30,663 

Size (FTE enrollment)

Less than 1,500 ................................. 1,839 2,224,541 289,498 67,518 1,199,403 87,499 1,500 to 4,999 ................................... 1,011 3,025,562 950,157 106,038 2,388,006 74,058 5,000 or more ................................... 558 7,082,774 1,504,991 100,562 3,743,936 175,702 

Carnegie classification (1994) 1

Research I and II .............................. 125 3,838,249 438,426 45,173 1,498,033 64,582 Doctoral I and II ............................... 110 1,599,764 471,680 31,032 869,345 75,639 Master’s I and II ................................ 518 2,673,953 971,002 54,003 3,415,313 57,655 Baccalaureate I and II .................... 599 1,698,606 272,245 69,144 935,894 64,314 Associate of Arts .............................. 1,182 1,391,549 177,970 31,682 204,730 29,511 Specialized ....................................... 558 831,404 394,517 33,654 303,016 38,055 Not classified .................................... 316 299,352 18,806 9,430 105,014 7,503 

 1 While ’level’ and ’Carnegie classification’ are similar, there is not complete overlap in the two classifications. ’Level’ refers to the highest level of any degree 

The ’Carnegie classification’ is based on criteria such as institution mission and research funding in addition to highest level of degree awarded. The Carnegdeveloped by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching and published in A Classification of Institutions of Higher Education, 1994 Edition.

 2 ’Sound recordings’ was previously labeled ’Audio materials,’ and ’Computer files’ was previously labeled ’Machine readable materials.’

SOURCE: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), 

B-8
Table B-8.- Number and percentage of FTE staff in academic libraries by staff category and by contro

level, size, and Carnegie Classification: 1996

Institutional characteristic

Total

number of

libraries

Total FTE

staff Percent

Librarians and other

professional All other paid staff Contributed service st

FTE Percent FTE Percent FTE Percen

All postsecondary degree-granting

institutions ............................................ 3,408 95,580 100.0% 27,268 28.5% 40,022 41.9% 291 0.3

Control

Public ............................................... 1,573 58,506 61.2 16,031 27.4 25,989 44.4 78 .1 Private .............................................. 1,835 37,074 38.8 11,237 30.3 14,033 37.9 213 .6 

Level 1

Total 4-year and above ................. 2,115 81,589 85.4 23,143 28.4 33,991 41.7 216 .3 

Doctor’s ........................................ 538 53,620 56.1 14,882 27.8 24,250 45.2 29 .1 Master’s ........................................ 905 20,402 21.3 6,059 29.7 7,390 36.2 120 .6 Bachelor’s .................................... 670 7,552 7.9 2,198 29.1 2,342 31.0 66 .9 

Less than 4-year .............................. 1,293 13,990 14.6 4,125 29.5 6,031 43.1 75 .5 

Size (FTE enrollment)

Less than 1,500 ................................ 1,839 14,891 15.6 4,747 31.9 4,898 32.9 162 1.1 1,500 to 4,999 .................................. 1,011 21,498 22.5 6,409 29.8 8,566 39.8 69 .3 5,000 or more .................................. 558 59,190 61.9 16,111 27.2 26,558 44.9 60 .1 

Carnegie classification (1994) 1

Research I and II ............................. 125 33,400 34.9 9,134 27.3 15,778 47.2 7 .0 Doctoral I and II .............................. 110 10,301 10.8 2,854 27.7 4,344 42.2 5 0 Master’s I and II ............................... 518 19,465 20.4 5,559 28.6 7,539 38.7 62 .3 Baccalaureate I and II ................... 599 10,536 11.0 2,979 28.3 3,341 31.7 77 .7 Associate of Arts ............................. 1,182 13,353 14.0 3,986 29.9 5,824 43.6 69 .5 Specialized ...................................... 558 6,349 6.6 2,071 32.6 2,500 39.4 45 .7 Not classified ................................... 316 2,175 2.3 685 31.5 696 32.0 26 1.2 

 1 While ’level’ and ’Carnegie classification’ are similar, there is not complete overlap in the two classifications. ’Level’ refers to the highest level of any degree 

The ’Carnegie classification’ is based on criteria such as institution mission and research funding in addition to highest level of degree awarded. The Carnegdeveloped by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching and published in A Classification of Institutions of Higher Education, 1994 Edition.

SOURCE: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), 

B-9
Table B-9.- Total operating expenditures and number of libraries by category of total operating expendit

by control, level, size, and Carnegie Classification of institution: 1996

Institutional characteristic

Total

number of

libraries

Total

operating

expenditures

Number of libraries

Less

than

$20,000

$20,000

to

$49,999

$50,000

to

$99,999

$100,000

to

$199,999

$200,000

to

$299,999

$300,000

to

$499,999

$500,0

to

$999,9

All postsecondary degree-granting

institutions ............................................ 3,408 $4,301,815,368 71 141 264 533 439 571 

Control

Public ............................................... 1,573 2,629,996,839 2 9 53 208 199 279 Private .............................................. 1,835 1,671,818,529 69 132 211 325 240 292 

Level 1

Total 4-year and above ................. 2,115 3,818,599,349 30 63 108 268 241 320 

Doctor’s ........................................ 538 2,714,421,008 3 1 7 28 25 43 Master’s ........................................ 905 836,213,574 7 18 31 79 106 152 Bachelor’s .................................... 670 266,939,482 20 44 70 160 110 125 

Less than 4-year .............................. 1,293 483,216,019 41 78 156 265 198 251 

Size (FTE enrollment)

Less than 1,500 ................................ 1,839 544,449,931 71 141 259 477 348 313 1,500 to 4,999 .................................. 1,011 882,597,067 0 0 5 56 91 240 5,000 or more .................................. 558 2,874,768,370 0 0 0 0 0 18 

Carnegie classification (1994) 1

Research I and II ............................. 125 1,780,260,273 0 0 0 0 0 0 Doctoral I and II .............................. 110 494,021,218 0 0 0 0 0 0 Master’s I and II ............................... 518 810,453,374 0 0 0 4 19 54 Baccalaureate I and II ................... 599 388,732,136 0 1 11 72 116 151 Associate of Arts ............................. 1,182 465,249,226 28 63 123 223 195 243 Specialized ...................................... 558 283,334,485 14 37 80 131 78 77 Not classified ................................... 316 79,764,656 29 40 50 103 31 46 

 1 While ’level’ and ’Carnegie classification’ are similar, there is not complete overlap in the two classifications. ’Level’ refers to the highest level of any degree 

The ’Carnegie classification’ is based on criteria such as institution mission and research funding in addition to highest level of degree awarded. The Carnegdeveloped by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching and published in A Classification of Institutions of Higher Education, 1994 Edition.

SOURCE: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), 

B-10
Table B-10.- Library operating expenditures by object of expenditure, and salaries as a percentage of total o

expenditures, by control, level, size, and Carnegie Classification of institution: 1996

Institutional characteristic

Total

number of

libraries

Total

operating

expenditures

Salaries and

wages

Salaries and wages

as a percentage of

total operating

expenditures

Information

resources total 2 Preserv

All postsecondary degree-granting

institutions ...................................................... 3,408 $4,301,815,368 $2,147,841,900 49.9% $1,499,248,832 $45,61

Control

Public ......................................................... 1,573 2,629,996,839 1,354,781,175 51.5 891,758,651 26,19Private ........................................................ 1,835 1,671,818,529 793,060,725 47.4 607,490,181 19,41

Level 1

Total 4-year and above ........................... 2,115 3,818,599,349 1,833,412,211 48.0 1,396,291,340 44,70

Doctor’s ................................................. 538 2,714,421,008 1,266,920,171 46.7 1,010,512,589 35,08Master’s ................................................. 905 836,213,574 431,734,182 51.6 293,735,688 7,21Bachelor’s .............................................. 670 266,939,482 134,355,328 50.3 91,632,253 2,38

Less than 4-year ........................................ 1,293 483,216,019 314,429,689 65.1 102,957,492 90

Size (FTE enrollment)

Less than 1,500 .......................................... 1,839 544,449,931 277,957,778 51.1 182,298,583 4,451,500 to 4,999 ............................................ 1,011 882,597,067 461,964,496 52.3 294,486,555 6,765,000 or more ............................................ 558 2,874,768,370 1,407,919,626 49.0 1,022,463,694 34,39

Carnegie classification (1994) 1

Research I and II ....................................... 125 1,780,260,273 823,957,381 46.3 651,191,726 25,04Doctoral I and II ........................................ 110 494,021,218 226,701,746 45.9 201,286,057 5,56Master’s I and II ......................................... 518 810,453,374 420,114,116 51.8 283,220,945 6,93Baccalaureate I and II ............................. 599 388,732,136 190,349,583 49.0 141,532,639 4,06Associate of Arts ....................................... 1,182 465,249,226 304,401,544 65.4 99,617,823 89Specialized ................................................ 558 283,334,485 140,349,932 49.5 97,456,432 2,66Not classified ............................................. 316 79,764,656 41,967,598 52.6 24,943,210 44

 1 While ’level’ and ’Carnegie classification’ are similar, there is not complete overlap in the two classifications. ’Level’ refers to the highest level of any degree 

The ’Carnegie classification’ is based on criteria such as institution mission and research funding in addition to highest level of degree awarded. The Carnegdeveloped by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching and published in A Classification of Institutions of Higher Education, 1994 Edition.

 2 ’Information resources total’ most closely resembles the category ’Collection expenditures total’ in the 1992 Academic Libraries E.D.-TABS report. 3 ’All other operating expenditures’ includes furniture and equipment, computer hardware and software, bibliographic utilities, networks, consortia, and all oth

SOURCE: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), 

B-11
Table B-11.- Operating expenditures for information resources, equipment and other selected categories of ex

by control, level, size, and Carnegie Classification of institution: 1996

Institutional

characteristic

Total

number of

libraries

Information

resources

total 2

Books and

bound serials

Current serial

subscriptions Microforms Audiovisual materials Computer files/search services 3 Document delivery/inter- library loan 3 Other information resources Furniture and equipment 3 Co

ha

and 

All postsecondary

degree-grantinginstitutions .................. 3,408 $1,499,248,832 $472,592,381 $780,829,819 $61,577,292 $28,879,323 $103,539,310 $17,644,832 $34,185,875 $56,127,578 $15

Control

Public ................... 1,573 891,758,651 265,738,952 486,186,639 34,043,863 17,449,508 57,795,046 10,782,704 19,761,939 36,116,065 9Private ................. 1,835 607,490,181 206,853,429 294,643,180 27,533,429 11,429,815 45,744,264 6,862,128 14,423,936 20,011,513 6

Level 1

Total 4-year and

above ................ 2,115 1,396,291,340 428,148,131 754,154,102 53,582,946 20,588,316 91,561,020 16,842,742 31,414,083 43,570,874 13

Doctor’s ........... 538 1,010,512,589 291,047,441 581,798,112 30,729,900 10,488,566 59,265,068 12,566,427 24,617,075 27,917,277 9Master’s ........... 905 293,735,688 99,343,630 135,626,876 17,989,097 7,146,447 24,749,850 3,194,455 5,685,333 11,896,724 2Bachelor’s ........ 670 91,632,253 37,659,363 36,523,808 4,863,889 2,943,484 7,459,938 1,071,212 1,110,559 3,742,547 1

Less than 4-year .. 1,293 102,957,492 44,444,250 26,675,717 7,994,346 8,291,007 11,978,290 802,090 2,771,792 12,556,704 1

Size (FTE enrollment)

Less than 1,500 .... 1,839 182,298,583 64,686,415 77,143,795 9,770,764 6,503,722 17,206,462 2,600,504 4,386,921 9,354,060 21,500 to 4,999 ...... 1,011 294,486,555 104,205,909 130,191,933 17,026,766 8,903,455 26,238,722 3,295,798 4,623,972 14,012,996 35,000 or more ...... 558 1,022,463,694 303,700,057 573,494,091 34,779,762 13,472,146 60,094,126 11,748,530 25,174,982 32,760,522 10

Carnegie

classification (1994) 1

Research I and II 125 651,191,726 188,026,497 380,527,029 17,484,217 5,370,608 33,909,375 7,854,130 18,019,870 16,817,923 6Doctoral I and II .. 110 201,286,057 55,917,975 116,395,406 6,967,039 2,438,634 12,879,927 2,460,086 4,226,990 5,472,792 1Master’s I and II .. 518 283,220,945 94,440,361 135,358,000 16,654,943 6,255,620 22,819,799 3,098,085 4,594,137 11,763,456 2Baccalaureate I

and II .................. 599 141,532,639 56,002,170 58,762,804 8,164,670 3,967,419 11,329,976 1,682,427 1,623,173 4,844,263 1

Associate of Arts 1,182 99,617,823 43,132,203 25,955,260 7,830,603 7,813,951 11,491,516 726,488 2,667,802 9,866,920 1Specialized .......... 558 97,456,432 25,841,660 53,686,514 3,317,776 1,956,105 8,788,715 1,567,828 2,297,834 3,850,962 1Not classified ...... 316 24,943,210 9,231,515 10,144,806 1,158,044 1,076,986 2,320,002 255,788 756,069 3,511,262 

 1 While ’level’ and ’Carnegie classification’ are similar, there is not complete overlap in the two classifications. ’Level’ refers to the highest level of any degree offered b

The ’Carnegie classification’ is based on criteria such as institution mission and research funding in addition to highest level of degree awarded. The Carnegie classificadeveloped by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching and published in A Classification of Institutions of Higher Education, 1994 Edition.

 2 ’Information resources total’ most closely resembles the category ’Collection expenditures total’ in the 1992 Academic Libraries E.D.-TABS report. 3 ’Computer files/search services’ was formerly labeled ’Machine readable materials.’ Both ’Document delivery/interlibrary loan’ and ’Bibliographic utilities, networks, c

survey. ’Computer hardware and software’ was previously included in the category ’Furniture and equipment,’ but was created as a separate category in 1994.NOTE: This table presents all the separate categories of expenses included on the survey form except ’Salaries and wages’ and ’Preservation.’ Totals for these categorSOURCE: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), "Academic 

B-12
Table B-12.- Percentage of responding institutions with selected electronic services, by control, level, size

Carnegie Classification of institution: 1996

Institutional characteristic

Electronic catalog that includes the library’s holdings Electronic indexes and refe

Access from Access off campus by Access from 

Within library Elsewhere on campus Primary clientele Others Within library Elsewhere on campus Primary 

All postsecondary

degree-granting institutions ....... 79.9% 59.9% 58.5% 55.5% 91.2% 52.5% 4

Control

Public ........................................ 90.8 71.4 69.4 66.2 98.1 60.1 4Private ....................................... 69.9 49.1 48.1 45.3 84.9 45.4 3

Level 1

Total 4-year and above .......... 82.4 67.7 66.6 63.5 92.8 62.0 5

Doctor’s ................................. 92.9 84.0 86.4 83.3 97.6 81.2 7Master’s ................................. 83.3 70.6 69.4 65.5 94.4 61.1 5Bachelor’s ............................. 72.6 49.2 45.0 42.9 86.8 46.3 3

Less than 4-year ....................... 75.7 46.9 44.7 41.8 88.6 36.5 2

Size (FTE enrollment)

Less than 1,500 ......................... 67.2 39.1 38.0 35.8 84.5 37.5 21,500 to 4,999 ........................... 91.2 74.8 71.3 67.3 98.1 60.1 45,000 or more ........................... 98.2 92.2 92.4 88.6 99.3 81.7 7

Carnegie classification (1994) 1

Research I and II ...................... 100.0 97.5 99.2 93.3 100.0 97.5 9Doctoral I and II ....................... 100.0 98.1 100.0 98.1 100.0 93.1 9Master’s I and II ........................ 95.7 87.6 85.9 80.9 99.8 78.0 6Baccalaureate I and II ............ 83.2 68.1 65.4 62.7 97.2 58.3 4Associate of Arts ...................... 77.2 49.5 46.5 43.4 89.9 37.2 2Specialized ............................... 64.0 39.0 39.3 37.5 80.9 39.4 3Not classified ............................ 66.1 31.1 30.7 29.9 78.0 35.9 3

See footnotes at end of table.

B-13
Table B-12.- Percentage of responding institutions with selected electronic services, by control, level, size

Carnegie Classification of institution: 1996 (continued)

Institutional characteristic

Electronic full text periodicals Electronic full text course 

Access from Access off campus by Access from 

Within library Elsewhere on campus Primary clientele Others Within library Elsewhere on campus Primary 

All postsecondary

degree-granting institutions ....... 69.7% 38.1% 31.8% 11.0% 6.3% 5.1% 

Control

Public ........................................ 84.0 47.0 38.6 14.5 7.0 5.9 Private ....................................... 56.6 29.6 25.3 7.6 5.7 4.4 

Level 1

Total 4-year and above .......... 67.0 44.5 39.0 11.5 7.7 6.9 

Doctor’s ................................. 73.9 60.2 57.6 15.8 13.9 12.8 1Master’s ................................. 66.5 42.8 36.0 11.5 5.7 5.2 Bachelor’s ............................. 61.9 33.0 26.6 7.8 5.3 4.4 

Less than 4-year ....................... 74.2 27.4 19.8 10.1 4.0 2.1 

Size (FTE enrollment)

Less than 1,500 ......................... 57.8 25.2 20.3 8.1 4.4 3.1 1,500 to 4,999 ........................... 79.4 43.0 34.2 10.3 5.3 4.0 5,000 or more ........................... 88.5 65.7 59.6 20.4 14.0 12.9 1

Carnegie classification (1994) 1

Research I and II ...................... 96.7 85.6 83.8 26.7 31.6 28.9 2Doctoral I and II ....................... 90.3 74.0 69.0 23.5 18.4 18.0 1Master’s I and II ........................ 79.0 54.5 46.7 12.5 6.4 5.6 Baccalaureate I and II ............ 73.3 42.9 34.6 10.2 6.3 5.5 Associate of Arts ...................... 75.0 27.6 20.2 10.3 4.2 2.3 Specialized ............................... 38.6 22.0 19.0 5.6 3.4 2.8 Not classified ............................ 59.8 28.8 24.7 8.8 4.2 2.4 

See footnotes at end of table.

B-14
Table B-12.- Percentage of responding institutions with selected electronic services, by control, level, size

Carnegie Classification of institution: 1996 (continued)

Institutional characteristic

Electronic files other than the catalog Internet access

Access from Access off campus by Access from 

Within library Elsewhere on campus Primary clientele Others Within library Elsewhere on campus Primary 

All postsecondary

degree-granting institutions ....... 38.1% 28.1% 26.4% 24.0% 80.9% 76.9% 5

Control

Public ........................................ 42.8 32.3 30.3 28.2 86.6 85.2 5Private ....................................... 33.8 24.1 22.6 19.9 75.6 69.0 4

Level 1

Total 4-year and above .......... 45.1 36.7 35.2 31.8 84.2 81.2 6

Doctor’s ................................. 63.7 57.8 55.9 52.2 90.3 88.7 7Master’s ................................. 43.8 34.1 32.4 29.2 86.4 84.1 6Bachelor’s ............................. 31.5 21.7 20.6 17.3 76.3 70.6 4

Less than 4-year ....................... 26.5 13.7 11.5 10.7 75.3 69.7 3

Size (FTE enrollment)

Less than 1,500 ......................... 27.0 14.5 13.3 11.1 72.6 65.6 31,500 to 4,999 ........................... 41.6 32.1 29.4 26.8 87.5 86.4 55,000 or more ........................... 65.4 59.1 57.1 54.5 94.1 92.1 7

Carnegie classification (1994) 1

Research I and II ...................... 90.8 83.1 81.2 73.5 99.2 96.5 9Doctoral I and II ....................... 75.5 75.0 72.3 72.3 95.2 98.0 9Master’s I and II ........................ 51.3 44.6 42.3 38.8 92.9 94.3 7Baccalaureate I and II ............ 45.6 34.5 32.4 28.7 87.1 84.9 6Associate of Arts ...................... 26.5 14.2 11.8 11.0 76.6 70.8 3Specialized ............................... 27.7 16.8 15.2 13.2 70.2 60.9 3Not classified ............................ 25.5 11.4 11.9 8.8 67.8 58.4 3

See footnotes at end of table.

B-15
Table B-12.- Percentage of responding institutions with selected electronic services, by control, level, size

Carnegie Classification of institution: 1996 (continued)

Institutional characteristic

Library reference service by e-mail Capacity to place interlibrary loan/doc

electronically

Access from Access off campus by Access from 

Within library Elsewhere on campus Primary clientele Others Within library Elsewhere on campus Primary 

All postsecondary

degree-granting institutions ....... 40.1% 38.8% 36.4% 22.5% 60.0% 31.6% 3

Control

Public ........................................ 40.5 38.9 35.5 24.0 65.1 36.4 3Private ....................................... 39.7 38.6 37.2 21.1 55.3 27.0 2

Level 1

Total 4-year and above .......... 47.4 48.1 47.0 28.0 62.7 40.6 4

Doctor’s ................................. 63.6 64.8 66.7 43.3 72.6 57.8 5Master’s ................................. 45.1 45.9 43.8 23.7 60.1 37.1 3Bachelor’s ............................. 37.3 36.5 34.1 20.7 58.3 30.6 2

Less than 4-year ....................... 27.9 23.0 18.3 13.3 55.5 16.4 1

Size (FTE enrollment)

Less than 1,500 ......................... 35.2 31.4 28.9 18.9 55.5 19.5 11,500 to 4,999 ........................... 40.0 41.5 37.6 21.4 62.3 35.8 35,000 or more ........................... 55.2 54.6 55.1 34.4 69.3 58.3 5

Carnegie classification (1994) 1

Research I and II ...................... 84.9 86.3 88.8 57.5 80.0 76.1 7Doctoral I and II ....................... 56.7 60.8 64.7 41.1 73.8 72.5 6Master’s I and II ........................ 49.3 49.9 47.0 26.0 64.9 48.0 4Baccalaureate I and II ............ 46.3 48.3 45.6 25.3 65.6 40.3 3Associate of Arts ...................... 27.9 23.5 18.4 13.5 56.2 17.0 1Specialized ............................... 40.8 37.7 38.9 24.8 55.8 21.3 2Not classified ............................ 31.2 27.7 25.6 17.1 46.6 18.8 1

See footnotes at end of table.

B-16
Table B-12.- Percentage of responding institutions with selected electronic services, by control, level, size

Carnegie Classification of institution: 1996 (continued)

Institutional characteristic

Electronic document delivery

by the library to patron’s

account/address

Computers not dedicated to

library functions for patron use

inside the library

Computer software for patron

use inside the library

Technology in the library to

assist patrons with disabilities

All postsecondary

degree-granting institutions ....... 16.5% 63.4% 60.5% 42.1% 

Control

Public ........................................ 19.0 62.8 58.0 62.0 Private ....................................... 14.2 64.0 62.7 23.8 

Level 1

Total 4-year and above .......... 19.6 66.5 62.9 39.5 

Doctor’s ................................. 24.8 72.4 64.3 59.4 Master’s ................................. 19.9 63.3 59.9 39.6 Bachelor’s ............................. 14.8 66.2 65.8 22.9 

Less than 4-year ....................... 11.4 58.3 56.5 46.4 

Size (FTE enrollment)

Less than 1,500 ......................... 12.7 65.3 64.8 23.4 1,500 to 4,999 ........................... 17.3 57.8 54.4 52.1 5,000 or more ........................... 26.4 67.7 58.3 80.8 

Carnegie classification (1994) 1

Research I and II ...................... 33.3 81.5 67.2 90.8 Doctoral I and II ....................... 33.3 70.2 63.7 73.5 Master’s I and II ........................ 22.4 63.2 59.0 58.6 Baccalaureate I and II ............ 20.2 64.9 61.8 28.2 Associate of Arts ...................... 10.8 57.4 55.5 48.1 Specialized ............................... 12.0 68.7 67.0 17.7 Not classified ............................ 15.5 65.6 65.1 25.5 

 1 While ’level’ and ’Carnegie classification’ are similar, there is not complete overlap in the two classifications. ’Level’ refers to the highest level of any degree 

The ’Carnegie classification’ is based on criteria such as institution mission and research funding in addition to highest level of degree awarded. The Carnegdeveloped by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching and published in A Classification of Institutions of Higher Education, 1994 Edition.

NOTE: Total number of institutions responding to each question is shown in Table ANOTE: This is a new table in the 1996 Academic Libraries E.D.-TABS report, reflecting the addition of the Electronic Services section to the 1996 IPEDS AcademiSOURCE: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), "

B-17
Table B-13a.- Academic library circulation per full-time-equivalent (FTE) enrollment, by level and control of institution

Total

postsecondary

degreegranting

institutions

4-year institutions

Less than

4-year Pu

Total 4-year

institutions

Highest level of degree

Doctor’s Master’s Bachelor’s

General circulation per FTE student 1

Lower quartile ................................ 5.8 9.1 12.7 8.7 7.0 3.5 Median ........................................... 11.6 16.6 21.0 15.4 14.8 6.5 Upper quartile ................................ 22.6 30.0 41.6 24.5 29.1 11.3 

Reserve circulation per FTE student 1

Lower quartile ................................ .8 1.6 2.5 1.6 .9 .3 Median ........................................... 2.6 3.7 4.8 3.5 3.0 1.3 Upper quartile ................................ 5.8 7.7 8.7 6.5 8.4 2.9 

Total circulation per FTE student 1

Lower quartile ................................ 7.8 12.5 17.5 12.2 9.8 4.8 Median ........................................... 15.0 21.5 28.0 19.2 19.3 8.4 Upper quartile ................................ 29.2 38.1 52.6 32.1 37.1 14.2 

 1 FTE enrollment is calculated by adding one-third of part-time enrollment to full-time enrollment.

NOTE: Twenty-five percent of institutions fall into each quartile grouping. All institutions in the lower quartile were at or below the number given in the taand all institutions in the upper quartile were at or above the upper quartile number. For example, all institutions within the lower quartile had 5.8 or fewtransactions per FTE student.SOURCE: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPESurvey, 1996" and "Fall Enrollment Survey, 1995."

B-18
Table B-13b.- Number of books and bound serials volumes held at the end of the year, and added during the year by ac

full-time-equivalent (FTE) student, by level and control of institution, United States: 1996

Total

postsecondary

degreegranting

institutions

4-year institutions

Less than

4-year Pub

Total 4-year

institutions

Highest level of degree

Doctor’s Master’s Bachelor’s

Volumes held per FTE student 1

Lower quartile ............................ 20.8 56.9 68.2 55.2 43.9 11.4 1Median ....................................... 58.2 92.1 111.2 81.2 94.9 19.0 3Upper quartile ............................ 118.8 165.2 208.1 142.2 167.1 31.9 6

Volumes added per FTE student 1

Lower quartile ............................ .6 1.2 1.8 1.1 1.0 .3 Median ....................................... 1.5 2.3 2.8 1.9 2.3 .6 Upper quartile ............................ 3.2 4.4 5.4 3.8 4.4 1.2 

 1 FTE enrollment is calculated by adding one-third of part-time enrollment to full-time enrollment.

NOTE: Twenty-five percent of institutions fall into each quartile grouping. All institutions in the lower quartile were at or below the number given in the taand all institutions in the upper quartile were at or above the upper quartile number. For example, all institutions within the lower quartile had 20.8 or festudent.SOURCE: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPSurvey, 1996" and "Fall Enrollment Survey, 1995."

B-19
Table B-13c.- Total academic library staff, except student assistants, per 1,000 full-time-equivalent (FTE) stu

by level and control of institution, United States: 1996

Total

postsecondary

degreegranting

institutions

4-year institutions

Less than

4-year Pub

Total 4-year

institutions

Highest level of degree

Doctor’s Master’s Bachelor’s

Total staff per 1,000 FTE students 1

Lower quartile ............................ 3.6 5.1 6.2 4.8 4.9 2.5 Median ....................................... 5.8 7.5 9.5 6.5 7.8 3.6 Upper quartile ............................ 9.9 12.4 16.4 10.6 11.7 5.4 

 1 FTE enrollment is calculated by adding one-third of part-time enrollment to full-time enrollment.

NOTE: Twenty-five percent of institutions fall into each quartile grouping. All institutions in the lower quartile were at or below the number given in the taand all institutions in the upper quartile were at or above the upper quartile number. For example, all institutions within the lower quartile had 3.6 or fewFTE students.SOURCE: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPSurvey, 1996" and "Fall Enrollment Survey, 1995."

B-20
Table B-13d.- Total operating expenditures for academic libraries, information resources, and serials expendi

full-time-equivalent (FTE) student, by level and control of institution, United States: 1996

Total

postsecondary

degreegranting

institutions

4-year institutions

Less than

4-year Pub

Total 4-year

institutions

Highest level of degree

Doctor’s Master’s Bachelor’s

Total operating expenditures per

FTE student 1

Lower quartile ............................ $179.06 $287.00 $399.50 $273.57 $244.38 $117.17 $14Median ....................................... $310.22 $420.50 $606.00 $366.00 $381.50 $170.71 $22Upper quartile ............................ $531.60 $702.50 $1,109.00 $565.50 $595.25 $249.40 $33

Expenditures for information

resources per FTE student 1, 2

Lower quartile ............................ $42.34 $85.25 $142.25 $81.06 $64.19 $21.92 $3Median ....................................... $90.07 $136.57 $220.75 $116.40 $113.65 $37.25 $5Upper quartile ............................ $178.14 $249.50 $391.50 $202.17 $199.25 $62.00 $10

Expenditures for current serials per

FTE student 1

Lower quartile ............................ $9.27 $26.99 $64.38 $27.78 $17.14 $4.84 $Median ....................................... $27.96 $51.75 $115.55 $45.05 $35.56 $8.74 $1Upper quartile ............................ $69.62 $107.85 $190.25 $78.62 $64.16 $15.16 $4

 1 FTE enrollment is calculated by adding one-third of part-time enrollment to full-time enrollment. 2 ’Information resources’ most closely resembles the category ’Collection expenditures’ in the 1992 Academic Libraries E.D.-TABS report.

NOTE: Twenty-five percent of institutions fall into each quartile grouping. All institutions in the lower quartile were at or below the number given in the taand all institutions in the upper quartile were at or above the upper quartile number. For example, all institutions within the lower quartile had total opeFTE student of $179.06 or less.SOURCE: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPSurvey, 1996" and "Fall Enrollment Survey, 1995."

B-21
Table B-13e.- Academic library expenditures as a percentage of Education and General (E&G) expenditures; and ex

information resources, current serials, and salaries and wages as a percentage of total library operating expe

by level and control of institution, United States: 1996

Total

postsecondary

degreegranting

institutions

4-year institutions

Less than

4-year Pub

Total 4-year

institutions

Highest level of degree

Doctor’s Master’s Bachelor’s

Total operating expenditures as

percentage of E&G expenditures

Lower quartile ............................ 1.9% 2.2% 2.3% 2.3% 2.0% 1.5% 1.

Median ....................................... 2.7% 2.9% 3.1% 2.9% 2.8% 2.2% 2.Upper quartile ............................ 3.6% 4.0% 4.2% 3.9% 4.0% 3.0% 3.

Expenditures for information

resources as a percentage oftotal operating expenditures 1

Lower quartile ............................ 21.8% 26.6% 31.4% 26.7% 23.3% 16.9% 20.Median ....................................... 29.8% 33.7% 37.0% 33.0% 31.1% 23.1% 27.Upper quartile ............................ 37.6% 40.1% 42.3% 39.7% 38.4% 29.6% 35.

Expenditures for current serials as a

percentage of total informationresources expenditures

Lower quartile ............................ 21.6% 26.6% 37.3% 26.9% 21.7% 17.5% 21.Median ....................................... 33.0% 40.6% 54.0% 39.0% 33.9% 25.0% 32.Upper quartile ............................ 48.4% 54.1% 65.1% 51.3% 45.7% 33.4% 51.

Salaries and wages as a

percentage of total operatingexpenditures

Lower quartile ............................ 46.3% 44.2% 42.1% 45.0% 45.5% 53.5% 49.Median ....................................... 54.7% 50.9% 47.6% 52.7% 52.5% 62.7% 57.Upper quartile ............................ 65.0% 59.3% 53.0% 60.4% 62.7% 72.1% 67.

 1 ’Information resources’ most closely resembles the category ’Collection expenditures’ in the 1992 Academic Libraries E.D.-TABS report.

NOTE: Twenty-five percent of institutions fall into each quartile grouping. All institutions in the lower quartile were at or below the number given in the taand all institutions in the upper quartile were at or above the upper quartile number. For example, all institutions within the lower quartile had total opepercentage of E&G expenditures of 1.9 percent or less.SOURCE: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPSurvey, 1996" and "Finance Survey, 1996."

B-22
C-1

Appendix C: Academic Library Indicators

Indicators for Academic Library Performance:

Ratios from the Association of Research Libraries Statistics

1994-95

Taken from the Association of Research Libraries: http://www.arl.org/stats/arlstat/indi96.html, and 

http://www.arl.org/stats/arlstat/index.html#indicato

Ratio 1: Professional Staff as a Percentage of Total Staff 

Ratio 2: Support Staff as a Percentage of Total Staff

Ratio 3: Student Assistants as a Percentage of Total Staff

Ratio 4: Ratio of Support to Professional Staff

Ratio 5: Items Loaned over Items Borrowed

Ratio 6: Serials Expenditures over Materials Expenditures

Ratio 7: Library Materials Expenditures over Total Expenditures

Ratio 8: Binding Expenditures over Total Expenditures

Ratio 9: Salary Expenditures over Total Expenditures

Ratio 10: Operating Expenditures over Total Expenditures

Ratio 11: Unit Price of Monographs

Ratio 12: Unit Price of Serials

Ratio 13: Items Borrowed per Faculty

Ratio 14: Total Expenditures per Faculty

Ratio 15: Volumes Added (Gross) per Faculty

Ratio 16: Volumes Held per Faculty

Ratio 17: Paid Serial Subscriptions per Faculty

Ratio 18: Monographs Purchased per Faculty 

Ratio 19: Number of Faculty per Library Staff Member

Ratio 20: Expenditures for Library Materials per Faculty

Ratio 21: Expenditures for Serials per Faculty

Ratio 22: Items Borrowed per Student

Ratio 23: Total Expenditures per Student

Ratio 24: Volumes Added (Gross) per Student

Ratio 25: Volumes Held per Student

Ratio 26: Paid Serial Subscriptions per Student

Ratio 27: Monographs Purchased per Student

Ratio 28: Number of Students per Library Staff

Ratio 29: Expenditures for Library Materials per Student

Ratio 30: Expenditures for Serials per Student
D-1

Appendix D: Survey Questionnaire 

(Including Instructions and Definitions)
FORM IPEDS-L

(6-1-96)

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE BUREAU OF THE CENSUS 

ACTING AS COLLECTING AGENT FOR THE

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

NATIONAL CENTER FOR EDUCATION STATISTICS

INTEGRATED POSTSECONDARY

EDUCATION DATA SYSTEM

ACADEMIC LIBRARIES SURVEY

1996

Please read the accompanying instructions

before completing this survey form. Report

data ONLY for the institution in the address

label. If data for any other institutions or

branch campuses are included in this report

because they CANNOT be reported

separately, please provide a list of these

schools.

If there are any questions about this form, contact

a Bureau of the Census IPEDS representative at

(800) 451–6236 or FAX number (301) 457–1542,

7:30 a.m.—4:30 p.m. EST.

Date due: November 15, 1996

OMB No. 1850-0582: Approval Expires 04/30/98

NOTE – The completion of this survey, in a timely and accurate manner, is

MANDATORY for all institutions which participate or are applicants for

participation in any Federal financial assistance program authorized by Title IV of

the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended. The completion of this survey is

mandated by 20 U.S.C. 1094(a)(17).

Please correct any errors in the name, address, and ZIP Code.

1. Name of respondent 2. Title of respondent 3. Telephone

Does your institution have its own library, report with another institution or are you financially

supporting a shared library with another institution?

©

©

Has own library as defined in Part A of the instructions. — Please complete this survey.

For those institutions not required to complete this survey on the basis of the above

requirements, the completion of this survey is voluntary and authorized by P.L.

103–382, National Education Statistics Act of 1994, Sec. 404(a).

Area code, number, extension

FAX number

4. E-Mail address ©

Has own library but reports with another library — Go to Combined Data sheet, page 4

Does not have own library but contributes financial support to a shared library with the following postsecondary

institution(s). A shared library is a facility housing an organized collection of printed, microform, and audiovisual

materials, and (a) is jointly administered by more than one educational institution, or (b) whose funds or

operating expenditures have been received from more than one educational institution. The location of the

facility is not a determining factor. — Please complete the item below and return blank survey form to the

address shown above.

UNITID Name of Institution

Does not have own library — Please return this blank survey to the address shown above

1

2

3

4

RETURN TO
©

©

IPEDS-L (6-1-96)

Changes from the 1994 form for

1996 ACADEMIC LIBRARIES SURVEY

Part E — Library Services, Fiscal Year 1996

Data requests for document delivery/interlibrary loans provided to other libraries, as

well as those received from other libraries or commercial services, have been

expanded to request separate reporting for returnables and non-returnables, as well as

the total.

Part G — Electronic Services

This part was added to identify the availability of electronic services within the library

system. The questions require a "yes" or "no" response to the availability of the various

services listed.

Page 2

© Cover sheet — Own library question

The question has been expanded to allow for combined or shared library systems.
FORM IPEDS-L (6-1-96) Page 3

The definitions and instructions for compiling IPEDS data have been designed

to minimize comparability problems. However, postsecondary education

institutions differ widely among themselves. As a result of these differences,

comparisons of data provided by individual institutions may be misleading.

REMARKS SECTION — Please enter any remarks you may have in this section. By entering any

explanations here, you may eliminate the need for telephone contact at a later date.

DO NOT RETURN INSTRUCTIONS

According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, no persons are required to respond to a

collection of information unless it displays a valid OMB control number. The valid OMB control

number for this information collection is 1850-0582. The time required to complete this

information collection is estimated to vary from 30 minutes to 6.0 hours per response, with an

average of 2.5 hours, including the time to review instructions, search existing data resources,

gather and maintain the data needed, and complete and review the information collection. If you

have any comments concerning the accuracy of the time estimate(s) or suggestions for

improving this form, please write to: U.S. Department of Education, Information Management

Team, Washington, DC 20202-4652. If you have any comments or concerns regarding the

status of your individual submission of this form, write directly to:

National Center for Education Statistics/IPEDS

U.S. Department of Education

555 New Jersey Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20208-5652

PURPOSE OF THE SURVEY

USES OF DATA

The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) collects these data periodically to obtain and

report a comprehensive picture on the status of collections, transactions, staff, service per typical

week, and library operating expenditures in postsecondary institutions. The survey is being

conducted in compliance with the Center’s mission "to collect, and analyze, and disseminate

statistics and other data related to education in the United States . . .", (P.L. 103–382, National

Education Statistics Act of 1994, Sec. 404(a)).

Collection of these data over time will enable the nation to plan effectively for the development

and use of postsecondary education library resources. Congress uses the data to assess the need

for revisions of existing legislation concerning libraries and the allocation of Federal funds.

Federal agencies need the data to evaluate and administer library programs. State education

agencies and college librarians and administrators use the data for regional and national

comparisons of library resources to plan for the effective use of funds. Finally, library associations

and researchers use the survey results to determine the status of library operations and the

profession.
NOTICE OF COMBINED DATA FOR MORE THAN ONE INSTITUTION OR BRANCH

Institution name

FORM IPEDS-L (6-1-96) Page 4 UNITID Address City 

No Yes — Please indicate below, the UNITID (if known), name and address of the institutions for which data are included. The institution named on this report is including Libraries Survey data for other institutions/branches. UNITID Institution name Address City 

No Yes — Please list the UNITID, name, and address of the reporting institution. The Libraries Survey data for this institution are reported by another institution.
FORM IPEDS-L (6-1-96)

Part A — NUMBER OF PUBLIC SERVICE OUTLETS, FISCAL YEAR 1996

L

Page 5

01 Branch and independent libraries — Exclude main or central library.

Number Line

No. Item

02

03

04

05

06

Librarians and other professional staff

All other paid staff (except student assistants)

Contributed services staff

Student assistants from all funding sources

Total full-time equivalent staff — (Sum of lines 2 through 5)

Part B — LIBRARY STAFF, FALL 1996

(Exclude maintenance and custodial staff.)

NOTE: Report data to two decimals.

Number of full-time

equivalents

Line

No. Staff
FORM IPEDS-L (6-1-96)

Part C — LIBRARY OPERATING EXPENDITURES, FISCAL YEAR 1996

NOTE: Do not report the same expenditures more than once.

L

Page 6

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

Salaries and wages — Exclude employee fringe benefits.

Amount

(Whole dollars only)

Line

No. Category

Librarians and other professional staff

All other paid staff (except student assistants)

Student assistants

Information resources

Books, serial backfiles, and other print materials — Exclude current

serials and all microforms.

Current serials — Exclude microforms, audiovisual materials, and

machine-readable materials.

Microforms — Include current serials.

Audiovisual materials — Include current serials.

Computer files and search services — Include current serials.

Document delivery/Interlibrary loan

Other

Preservation

Furniture and equipment — Exclude computer equipment.

Computer hardware and software — Include maintenance.

Bibliographic utilities, networks, and consortia

All other operating expenditures

Total operating expenditures (Sum of lines 7 through 21)

07

08

09

Employee fringe benefits (if paid from the library budget)

$

$

$
FORM IPEDS-L (6-1-96)

Part D — LIBRARY COLLECTIONS, FISCAL YEAR 1996 L

Page 7

Books, serial backfiles, and government

documents that are accessible through the

library’s catalog — Include bound periodicals and

newspapers and exclude microforms.

Held at end of fiscal year

Line

No. Category

Government documents — Include government

documents that are not reported elsewhere.

24

25

Volumes

Titles

Units

Titles

26

27

Current serials — Include periodicals,

newspapers, and government documents.

Total number of paid and unpaid

subscriptions

28

Microforms

Units

Titles

30

31

Manuscripts and archives — Linear feet

Cartographic materials — Units

Graphic materials — Units

32

33

34

35

36

Sound recordings

Units

Titles

37

38

Film and video materials

Units

Titles

39

40

Computer files

Units

Titles

41 Other library materials — Units

Added during fiscal year

(1) (2)

Total number —

29 Titles (number of unique titles)
FORM IPEDS-L (6-1-96)

Part E — LIBRARY SERVICES, FISCAL YEAR 1996

L

Page 8

42

43

44

45

46

Circulation transactions

Number Line

No. Category

52

53

54

General collection

Reserve collection

Part F — LIBRARY SERVICES, TYPICAL WEEK, FALL 1996

Number Line

No.

Document delivery/Interlibrary loans provided to other libraries

Returnable

Non-returnable

Total

Document delivery/Interlibrary loans received from other libraries or commercial

services

Returnable

Non-returnable

Total

Public service hours in a typical week

Gate count in a typical week

Reference transactions in a typical week

Category

47

48

49

Information service to groups

Number of presentations

Number of persons served in presentations

50

51
FORM IPEDS-L (6-1-96)

Part G — ELECTRONIC SERVICES L

Page 9

Access off campus by —

Line

No. Category

This section requests information about the availability of electronic services in the library and

elsewhere on campus and off campus access by your primary clientele, and other users. — Please

respond to each item by marking an (X) in the appropriate column.

55

Does the library or parent institution offer

the following services?

An electronic catalog that includes the

library’s holdings

56

57

58

Internet access

Library reference service by e-mail

Access from —

(1)

Electronic indexes and reference tools

Electronic full text periodicals

Electronic full text course reserves

Within library Elsewhere on

campus

Primary

clientele Others

(2) (3) (4)

Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No

Electronic files other than the catalog

(e.g., finding aids, indices, manuscripts)

created by library staff

Capacity to place interlibrary loan/document

delivery requests electronically

Electronic document delivery by the

library to patron’s account/address

Computers not dedicated to library functions

for patron use inside the library

Computer software for patron use inside the

library (e.g., word processing, spreadsheet,

custom applications, etc.)

Technology in the library to assist patrons

with disabilities (e.g., TDD, specially equipped

work stations)

Instruction by library staff on use of

Internet resources

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

Mark (X) appropriate column.
FORM IPEDS-L (6-1-96) Instructions page 1

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS — L

REMOVE INSTRUCTIONS BEFORE MAILING AND RETAIN FOR YOUR FILES.

Please respond to each item on this form in the space provided. If the appropriate answer is zero or none,

use "0." If you do not collect data for an item, provide your best estimate. PLEASE DO NOT LEAVE ANY

LINES BLANK. If a line is left blank, NCES will impute a figure using the average for institutions with similar

characteristics. Include data for the main or central library and all branch and independent libraries that were

open all or part of fiscal year 1996.

INSTITUTIONAL IDENTIFICATION

In the space provided on the front page of this report, make

any necessary corrections to the preprinted address

information. Also, please enter the name, title, area code and

telephone number of the person responsible for completing

the report.

PERIOD OF REPORT

Report information for the following time periods as specified

in each section:

2. Typical week, Fall 1996 — A typical week is one that is

neither unusually busy nor unusually slow. Avoid vacation

periods for key staff or days when unusual events are

taking place on the campus or in the library. Choose a

week in which the library is open its regular hours. Include

any seven consecutive calendar days. (Section F)

3. Fall 1996 — The period during the fall of 1996 when the

survey form is being completed. (Section B – Library Staff)

Part A — NUMBER OF PUBLIC SERVICE OUTLETS,

FISCAL YEAR 1996

Library — An entity that provides all of the following:

1. An organized collection of printed or other materials, or a

combination thereof;

2. A staff trained to provide and interpret such materials as

required to meet the informational, cultural, recreational,

or educational needs of clientele;

3. An established schedule in which services of the staff are

available to clientele;

4. The physical facilities necessary to support such a

collection, staff, and schedule.

This includes libraries that are part of learning resource

centers.

Branch and independent libraries (line 1) — Report the

number of branch and independent libraries at your

institution that were open all or part of FY 1996. EXCLUDE

THE MAIN OR CENTRAL LIBRARY. Branch and independent

libraries are defined as auxiliary library service outlets with

quarters separate from the central library of an institution

which have a basic collection of books and other materials, a

regular staffing level, and an established schedule. Branch

and independent libraries are administered either by the

central library or, as in the case of some libraries (such as

law, medical, etc.), through the administrative structure of

other units within the university. Departmental study/reading

rooms are not included. Include data for all branch and

Part B — LIBRARY STAFF, FALL 1996

Full-time equivalent (FTE) employees — Report the

number of filled or temporarily vacant full-time equivalent

(FTE) positions during Fall 1996 paid from funds under library

control. To compute full-time equivalents of part-time

employees and student assistants, take the TOTAL number of

hours worked per week by part-time employees IN EACH

CATEGORY and divide it by the number of hours

CONSIDERED BY THE REPORTING LIBRARY TO BE A

FULL-TIME WORK WEEK (e.g., 60 hours per week of part-time

work divided by 40 hours per full-time week equals 1.5 FTE).

Data should be reported to two decimal places.

Librarians and other professional staff (line 2) — Report

the total FTE of librarians and other professional staff,

including administrators. Report staff members doing work

that requires professional education (the master’s degree or

its equivalent) in the theoretical and scientific aspects of

librarianship; also, in some libraries, staff performing

professional level tasks who, though not librarians, have

equivalent education and training in related fields (e.g.,

archives, computer sciences, business administration,

education).

All other paid staff (except student assistants)

(line 3) — Report the total FTE of all other library staff who

are paid annual salaries or hourly wages except students,

who are reported on line 5. Include technical and clerical staff,

but exclude maintenance and custodial staff.

Contributed services staff (line 4) — Report the total FTE

for contributed services staff. Contributed services staff are

those, such as members of religious orders, whose services

are valued by bookkeeping entries rather than by full cash

transactions. Do not include volunteers.

Student assistants from all funding sources (line 5) —

Report the total FTE of student assistants, employed on an

hourly basis whose wages are paid from funds under library

control or from a budget other than the library budget,

including College Work Study Program. Exclude maintenance

and custodial staff.

Total FTE staff (line 6) — Report the sum of lines 2

through 5.

1. Fiscal year 1996 — Any 12-month period between June

1, 1995 and September 30, 1996 which corresponds to

your institution’s fiscal year. (For Sections A, C, D, E)

Part C — LIBRARY OPERATING EXPENDITURES, FISCAL

YEAR 1996

Expenditures (lines 7–23) — Report funds expended by the

library in fiscal year 1996 (regardless of when received) from

its regular budget and from all other sources, e.g., research

grants, special projects, gifts and endowments, and fees for

services. If items in this section are not paid from the library

budget but can be easily identified in other parts of the

institution’s budget, report them here. Expenditures should be

reported for the 12-month period which corresponds to your

library’s fiscal year between the calendar period June 1, 1995,

to September 30, 1996. All expenditures should be reported in

whole dollars in the most appropriate category to provide an

unduplicated count of expenditures. Exclude expenditures for

new buildings and building renovation. DO NOT REPORT ANY

EXPENDITURES MORE THAN ONCE.

Shared library – A facility housing an organized collection of

printed, microform, and audiovisual materials, and (a) is

jointly administered by more than one education institution,

or (b) whose funds or operating expenditures have been

received from more than one educational institution. The

location of the facility is not a determining factor.

independent libraries on the campus. Include libraries on

branch campuses (i.e., located in another community) if

those campuses are registered under the same NCES UNITID

number as the main campus.
FORM IPEDS-L (6-1-96) Instructions page 2

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS – L — Continued

Part C — LIBRARY OPERATING EXPENDITURES, FISCAL

YEAR 1996 — Continued

Salaries and wages (lines 7–9) — Report expenditures for

full-time and part-time salaries and wages before deductions.

Exclude employee fringe benefits provided by your institution

for all regular library staff which may be reported on line 23.

Include salaries and wages from all sources paid to students

serving on an hourly basis. Federal funds paid to students in

the College Work Study Program should be reported here.

Exclude contributed services and maintenance and custodial

staff.

Books, serial backfiles, and other print materials

(line 10) — Report expenditures for all materials consisting

primarily of words and usually produced by making an

impression with ink on paper. Included in this category are

materials that do not require magnification: books,

government documents, braille materials, ephemeral print

materials, and the like. Exclude current serial subscriptions

and microforms.

Current serials (line 11) — Report expenditures for current

subscriptions to serials. These are publications issued in

successive parts, usually at regular intervals, and, as a rule,

intended to be continued indefinitely. Serials include

periodicals, newspapers, annuals (reports, yearbooks, etc.),

memoirs, proceedings, and transactions of societies. Exclude

expenditures for microforms, audiovisual materials, and

machine-readable materials.

Microforms (line 12) — Report expenditures for all

photographic reproductions of textual, tabular, or graphic

materials reduced in size so that they can be used only with

magnification. Examples of microforms are roll microfilm,

microcard, microfiche, and ultrafiche. Include current serials.

Audiovisual materials (line 13) — Report expenditures for

all library materials that are displayed by visual projection or

magnification or through sound reproduction, or both,

including graphic materials, audio materials, motion pictures,

video materials, and special visual materials such as

three-dimensional materials. Include current serials.

Computer files and search services (line 14) — Report

expenditures for materials considered part of the collection,

whether purchased or leased, such as CD-ROMs, magnetic

tapes, and magnetic disks, that are designed to be processed

by a computer or similar machine. Examples are U.S. Census

data tapes, locally-mounted databases, electronic journals,

and reference tools on CD-ROM, tape, or disk. Include current

serials. Include expenditures for online searches of remote

databases. Include expenditures for equipment when the cost

is inseparably bundled into the price of the information

service product. Exclude expenses for library system software

and microcomputer software used only by the library staff

which are reported on line 19.

Document delivery/Interlibrary loan (line 15) — Report

expenditures for document delivery and interlibrary loan

services. Include fees paid for photocopies, costs of

telefacsimile transmission, royalties and access fees paid to

provide document delivery or interlibrary loan. Include fees

paid to bibliographic utilities if the portion paid for interlibrary

loan can be separately counted. Do not count expenditures

related to transactions between the main or central library

and any libraries reported in Part A, transactions between

libraries reported in Part A, or expenditures for on campus

delivery.

Other (line 16) — Report any other collection expenditures

not already included on lines 10–15 such as expenditures for

cartographic materials and manuscripts.

Preservation (line 17) — Report expenditures for the

activities associated with maintaining library and archival

materials for use either in their original physical form or in

some other usable way. This includes but is not limited to

binding and rebinding, materials conservation, deacidification,

lamination, and restoration.

Furniture and equipment (line 18) — Report expenditures

for all library furniture and equipment purchased during the

1996 fiscal year. Include microform equipment, audiovisual

equipment, and related maintenance costs.

Computer hardware and software (line 19) — Report

expenditures from the library budget for computer hardware

and software used to support library operations, whether

purchased or leased, mainframe or microcomputer. Include

expenditures for maintenance. Include the expenditure for

equipment used to run information service products when

that expenditure can be separated from the price of the

product. Exclude expenditures reported on line 14.

Bibliographic utilities, networks, and consortia

(line 20) — Report expenditures for services provided by

national, regional, and local bibliographic utilities, networks,

and consortia. Exclude expenditures already reported on lines

14 and 15.

All other operating expenditures (line 21) — Report all

other expenditures not already reported on lines 7–20 except

employee fringe benefits which are reported on line 23.

Exclude expenditures for new buildings and building

renovations.

Total (line 22) — Report the sum of lines 7 through 21.

Employee fringe benefits (line 23) — If benefits are paid

from the library budget, report the amount here.

Part D — LIBRARY COLLECTIONS, FISCAL YEAR 1996

NOTE — Government documents should be included in the

count for each format (i.e., lines 24, 25, and 28–41).

Column (1), Total number added during fiscal year —

Report the gross number of each category added. Do not

subtract the number withdrawn.

Column (2), Total number held at end of fiscal year —

Report the total number of each category held at end of fiscal

year. To get this figure, take the total number held at the end

of the previous fiscal year, add the number added during the

fiscal year just ended and subtract the number withdrawn

during that period.

Units (lines 26, 30, 33, 34, 35, 37, 39, 41) — An individual

physical item of library material. Examples of units are: a

volume (books and serials); a reel, sheet, or card

(microforms); a sheet or bound atlas (cartographic materials);

a filmstrip, slide, photograph, or print (graphic materials); a

disk, cassette, cartridge, or reel (sound recordings, film and

video materials); a disk, tape, or cartridge (computer files).

Volumes (line 24) — Report the number of volumes of any

printed, mimeographed, or processed work contained in one

binding or portfolio, hardbound or paperbound, which has

been cataloged, classified, or otherwise made ready for use.

Include any government documents that are accessible

through the library’s catalog regardless of whether or not they

are separately shelved. This includes documents for which

records are provided by the library or downloaded from other

sources into the library catalog.
FORM IPEDS-L (6-1-96) Instructions page 3

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS – L — Continued

Titles (lines 25, 27, 29, 31, 36, 38, 40) — Report the

number of titles of publications which form a separate

bibliographic whole, whether issued in one or several

volumes, reels, disks, slides, or parts. The term "publication"

applies to printed materials, such as books, periodicals, and

government documents, as well as to such formats as

microforms, audiovisual materials, and computer files. To

determine the number of titles, count each unique

bibliographic record in the library’s catalog. NOTE — For

libraries which have card catalogs, a unique bibliographic

record is represented by a shelf list entry. Libraries with

electronic catalogs should be careful to distinguish between

the BIBLIOGRAPHIC record which describes the title and the

ITEM records which describe the individual volumes, parts,

reels, disks, etc. associated with the title. Examples: Six copies

of the same edition of a title count as one title or bibliographic

record; two editions of the same title which have been

cataloged or recorded separately count as two bibliographic

records; a set of six monographs for which there are six

bibliographic records counts as six titles; and two

multi-volume sets of the same edition for which one

bibliographic record has been made count as one title.

Government documents (lines 26 and 27) — Report the

number of units and titles of materials in all formats not

accessible through the library catalog and not reported

elsewhere.

Current serials (lines 28 and 29) — Report the total

number of current serials received including those that are

paid for and those received without payment. Include

government documents issued serially. Exclude microforms,

audiovisual materials, and machine- readable materials.

Microforms (lines 30 and 31) — Report the number of units

of microforms and the number of different titles of materials

that have been photographically reduced in size for storage,

protection and inexpensive publication purposes, and which

must be read with the help of enlarging instruments.

Examples of microforms are: roll microfilm, microcard,

microfiche, and ultrafiche. Include government documents.

Manuscripts and archives (line 32) — Report the linear

feet of shelf space occupied by these materials. Manuscripts

are handwritten or typed documents, including carbon copies.

Archives are non-current records of an organization or

institution preserved because of their continuing value.

Include government documents.

Cartographic materials (line 33) — Report the number of

units of materials representing in whole or in part the earth or

any celestial body at any scale. These materials include twoand three-dimensional maps and globes. Include government

documents.

Graphic materials (line 34) — Report the number of units of

materials for viewing without sound. The materials may or

may not be projected or magnified. They include art originals,

art prints, art reproductions, slides, transparencies, filmstrips,

photographs, pictures, postcards, posters, study prints, and

the like. Filmstrips that also include sound should be included

on this line. Include government documents.

Sound recordings (lines 35 and 36) — Report the number

of units and titles of materials on which sounds (only) are

stored (recorded) and that can be reproduced (played back)

mechanically, electronically, or both. These materials include

audio cassettes, audio cartridges, audio discs, audio reels,

talking books, and other sound recordings. Include

government documents.

Film and video materials (lines 37 and 38) — Report the

number of units and titles of materials on film or video media.

Films are produced in a variety of sizes (8, super 8, 16, 35, 55,

and 70 mm) and a variety of formats (cartridge, cassette, loop,

reel). Video materials include videotapes and laser disks on

which pictures and sound are recorded. Include government

documents.

Other library materials (line 41) — Report here the number

of units of any materials not already included on lines 24–40.

Include government documents.

Part E — LIBRARY SERVICES, FISCAL YEAR 1996

Circulation transactions (lines 42 and 43) — Report the

number of items lent from the general collection on line 42

and from the reserve collection on line 43 for use usually

(although not always) outside the library. These activities

include initial charges, either manual or electronic, and also

renewals, each of which is reported as a circulation

transaction.

Reserve collection (line 43) — Those materials that have

been removed from the general library collection and set

aside in a library so they will be on hand for a certain course

of study or activity in process. Usually, the circulation and

length of loan of items in a reserve collection are restricted so

that these items will be available to many users who have

need of them within a limited time period.

Document delivery/Interlibrary loans (lines 44–49) — On

lines 44, 45, and 46, report the number of filled requests for

material provided to other libraries. On lines 47, 48, and 49,

report the number of filled requests for material received from

other libraries or document delivery services. Do not include

transactions between the main or central library and any

libraries reported in Part A or transactions between libraries

reported in Part A.

Information services to groups (lines 50 and 51) —

Report the total number of presentations (line 50) and the

total number of persons attending or served by those

presentations (line 51). Information services to groups are

presentations at which a staff member or person invited by a

staff member provides information intended for a number of

persons and planned in advance. These services may be

either bibliographic instruction or library use presentations, or

cultural, recreational, or educational presentations.

Presentations both on and off the library premises should be

included, as long as they are sponsored by the library. Do not

include meetings sponsored by other groups using library

meeting rooms.

Computer files (lines 39 and 40) — Report the number of

units and titles of materials such as CD-ROMs, magnetic tapes

and magnetic disks, that are designed to be processed by a

computer or similar machine. Examples are U.S. Census data

tapes, locally-mounted databases, electronic journals, and

reference tools on CD-ROM, tape, or floppy disk. Exclude

bibliographic records used to manage the collection, library

system software, and microcomputer software used only by

the library staff. Include current serials. Include government

documents. If a CD-ROM subscription for a title is contained

on one disc that is updated (i.e., replaced) once a month,

count as one unit, not twelve.

Returnables (lines 44 and 47) — Report materials that the

supplier/lending library expects to have returned. Examples of

returnables include books, dissertations and theses, microfilm

reels, sound recordings, and audiovisual material.

Non-returnables (lines 45 and 48) — Report materials that

the supplier/lending library does not expect to have returned.

Examples of non-returnables include photocopies or

facsimiles, fiche-to-fiche copies, print copies from microfilm,

electronic full-text documents, and gratis print copies of

unpublished reports and/or departmental working papers.
FORM IPEDS-L (6-1-96) Instructions page 4

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS – L — Continued

Part F — LIBRARY SERVICES – TYPICAL WEEK FALL

1996

Gate count in a typical week (line 53) — Report the

number of persons who physically enter library facilities in a

typical week. It is understood that a single person may be

counted more than once.

Reference transactions in a typical week (line 54) —

Report the total number of reference transactions in a typical

week. A reference transaction is an information contact that

involves the knowledge, use, recommendation, interpretation,

Do not report directional transactions here. A directional

transaction is an information contact which facilitates the use

of the library in which the contact occurs and which does NOT

involve the knowledge, use, recommendation, interpretation,

or instruction in the use of any information sources other than

those which describe the library, such as schedules, floor

plans, handbooks, and policy statements. Examples of

directional transactions include giving instruction in locating,

within the library, staff, library users, or physical features, etc.,

and giving assistance of a nonbibliographic nature with

machines.

Public service hours in a typical week (line 52) — Report

an unduplicated count of public service hours in a typical week

for both main library and branches reported in Part A using the

following method. If a library is open from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00

p.m. Monday through Friday, it should report 40 hours per

week. If several of its branches are also open during those

hours, the figure remains 40 hours per week. Should Branch A

also be open one evening from 7:00 to 9:00, the total hours

during which users can find service becomes 42. If Branch B is

open the same hours on the same evening, the total remains

42, but if it is open 2 hours on another evening, or from 5:00 to

7:00 on the evening when Branch A is open later, the total

becomes 44 hours during which users can find service.

Collect data during a typical week in the fall. A typical week is

one that is neither unusually busy nor unusually slow. Avoid

vacation periods for key staff or days when unusual events

are taking place on the campus or in the library. Choose a

week in which the library is open its regular hours. Include

any seven consecutive calendar days. If waiting for a typical

week in Fall 1996 will delay this form, please use typical week

data from the preceding fiscal year. If you have data for the

entire year, divide by the number of weeks that the library

was open.

Part G — ELECTRONIC SERVICES

This section requests information about the availability of

electronic services in the library and elsewhere on campus

and off campus access by your primary clientele, and other

users. The questions require a "yes" or "no" response to the

availability of the various services listed.

or instruction in the use of one or more information sources

by a member of the library staff. Information sources include

printed and non-printed materials, machine-readable

databases (including assistance with computer searching)

catalogs and other holdings records, and, through

communication or referral, other libraries and institutions, and

persons both inside and outside the library. Include

information and referral services. If a contact includes both

reference and directional services, it should be reported as

one reference transaction. When a staff member utilizes

information gained from a previous use of information

sources to answer a question, report as a reference

transaction, even if the source is not consulted again during

this transaction. Duration should not be an element in

determining whether a transaction is a reference transaction.

GLOSSARY

ACADEMIC LIBRARIES SURVEY – L

BRANCH INSTITUTION — A campus or site of an

educational institution that is not temporary, is located in a

community beyond a reasonable commuting distance from its

parent institution, and offers organized PROGRAMS of study,

not just courses.

COLLEGE WORK-STUDY PROGRAM (CWS) — (Higher

Education Act of 1965, as amended, Title IV, Part C; Public

Laws 89-329, 92-318, 94-482, et al; 42 USC 2751-2756b.)

UNITID CODE — Unique identification number assigned to

postsecondary institutions surveyed through the Integrated

Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS).

Provides part-time employment to eligible postsecondary

students to help meet educational expenses. This program

SHARED LIBRARY — A facility housing an organized

collection of printed, microform, and audiovisual materials,

and (a) is jointly administered by more than one educational

institution, or (b) whose funds or operating expenditures have

been received from more than one education institution. The

location of the facility is not a determining factor.

provides grants to institutions for partial reimbursement of

wages paid to students.