Short Communications

Science Libraries Today: An Update on ARL Institutions

Chris Doty
Science Librarian
Woodruff Library
Emory University
Atlanta, GA
chris.doty@emory.edu

Kristan Majors
Science Librarian
Woodruff Library
Emory University
Atlanta, GA
kmajors@emory.edu

Abstract

Keywords: Science libraries, Science & technology libraries, ARL Libraries, Academic library, Engineering library

Recommended Citation:

Doty, C., & Majors, K. (2025). Science libraries today: An update on ARL institutions. Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship, 110. https://doi.org/10.29173/istl2883

Distribution of Science Libraries at ARL Institutions

Our current study updates the data on science libraries at Association of Research Libraries (ARL) member colleges and universities in Canada and the United States and compares it to previous studies. Relying on key reports that established the groundwork and terminology for our study, a science branch library is defined as a library “with collections and staff, which is physically separate or divided from other library service units” to serve the needs of one or two departments and/or several related subject areas (ACRL, 1991, p. 171); or “discrete collections” housed in main libraries (Croneis & Short, 1999); this excludes health/medical and professional libraries (e.g. veterinary) and facilities beyond the main campus (e.g. marine lab libraries).

We are using a web-based count, and these methodologies are similar to Zdravkovska (2011) and Radecki and Springer (2020). Radecki and Springer noted a “web-based inventory” is an accepted and successful methodology for library science research. One downside recognized by Radecki and Springer is the possibility of undercounting, which we agree does occur, but we believe our 2017 dataset (Doty & Majors, 2019) helps reduce these errors.

Based on these criteria, we counted 152 science branch libraries at 120 ARL institutions in 2023, which is down from 182 at 114 ARL universities in 2017 (Doty & Majors, 2019). As shown in Fig. 1, one third of ARL universities have no science library, one third have only one science library, and 5 ARL universities (4%) have five or more science libraries. In comparison, in 1988 it was noted for large research universities in the United States “with five to twelve [academic science libraries] not uncommon in a large university” (Dionne, 1988, p. 270). Dionne observed that large research universities tend to have more branch libraries, in general, and this is still accurate as we found 9 universities (7% of the 120 total ARL university members) have four or more science libraries, accounting for 30% of the 152 science libraries.

ARL Science Libraries Over Time, a Comparison of Studies

In 1983 the ARL surveyed member institutions with a response rate of 90% (94 out of 104 members) and published the data as a SPEC Survey on Branch Libraries in ARL Institutions (Association of Research Libraries, 1983). Unfortunately comparing this data shared in the SPEC Survey is problematic as it explains, “The table contains many duplicate listings, and for that reason, has no totals” (p. 2). Going through the table line-by-line, eliminating duplicates, and making educated guesses, we estimate in 1983 there were 328 science libraries, 288 of which were administered by the library. We see in Table 1 below that the number of science libraries has decreased 45% since 1983, even as the number of ARL institutions increased by 15%. Comparing our 2023 dataset to our 2017 dataset (Doty & Majors, 2024), we calculate the number of science libraries has decreased 14% since 2017. Yet, 6 ARL institutions have been added since 2017, which is a 5% increase. Since 2010, there has been a 31% decrease in science libraries in the United States. This is due to the continuing consolidation of single-subject departmental libraries into multidisciplinary science libraries or closures where collections are sent to either the main campus library or off-site storage facilities. Overall, we see “Science” and “Science & Engineering” libraries now make up a much higher percentage of branch libraries at all ARL institutions compared to 1983 (11% “science” and “science & engineering” branches compared to all science discipline branches in 1983 vs. 52% in 2023).

	U.S. & Canada			U.S. only
	1983a	2017b	2023	2010c	2017b	2023
Mathematics	44	22	15	27	21	14
Engineering	39	23	20	27	20	17
Physics	38	8	3	15	7	2
Chemistry	37	11	7	20	10	6
Geology	31	13	11	12	12	10
Science	23	26	22	17	24	20
Science & Engineering	n/a	32	38	21	22	27
Total	212	135	116	139	116	96
aData obtained from Table 4 on page 5 in Association of Research Libraries, 1983 bData obtained from Table 1 in Doty and Majors, 2019 cData obtained from Table 2.1 in Zdravkovska, 2011

Thirty-six science libraries in the U.S. and Canada are not included in the 2023 column in Table 1. Table 1 uses terminology developed by ARL and academia forty years ago. Studying those not included in Table 1, we categorize the remaining libraries as either multidisciplinary or one-of-a-kind. These one-of-a-kind libraries are described by ARL as “local collections closely attuned to specialists' needs [that] continue to attract support” (1983, Trends and Issues section), and some of them are listed in ARL’s 1983 original table, such as aviation and meteorology.

In our previous ISTL study (Doty & Majors, 2019), we used a survey to count closures and mergers just as ARL did in 1983. However, for our 2023 study, we used our 2017 list of libraries to calculate an inventory count of any libraries that had closed or merged since then. For our studies, we define a closure as the collections, staff, and/or services are moved to the main library or a storage facility, whereas a merger means the collections, staff, and/or services moved to another science branch library. In Table 2 we calculate the total number of universities impacted by closures and mergers in order to compare 1983 data, whereas Table 3 reports the total number of science library branches with closures and mergers in order to compare 1999 data.

	1983b	2017c	2023
Closures	5 (5.3%)	11 (25%)	15 (13%)
Mergers	14 (15%)	8 (18%)	7 (6%)
aThe total number of survey respondents was used to calculate the percentage of universities impacted [94 in 1983 and 44 (39% response rate) in 2017] bData obtained from Table 6 on page 6 in Association of Research Libraries, 1983 cData obtained from Table 2 in Doty and Majors, 2019

	1999b	2017c	2023
Closures	11 (6.7%)	21 (32%)	21 (12%)
Mergers	4 (2.5%)	8 (12%)	13 (7%)
aThe total number of science branch libraries reported by respondents was used to calculate the percentage of branches impacted [163 in 1999 and 65 in 2017] bData obtained from question 8 on page 17 in Croneis and Short, 1999 cData obtained from Table 3 in Doty and Majors, 2019

In our 2019 ISTL article, we wrote,

It is tempting to ... wonder if science libraries are approaching a steady-state. The greatest challenge to this is most likely to come from those schools that still have a large number of science libraries. By our count, the following 11 schools have 62 science libraries – one third of the total for ARL universities: Pennsylvania State University, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, University of Notre Dame, University of Virginia, Cornell University, Ohio State University, University of Texas at Austin, University of California, Berkeley, University of Toronto, Harvard University, and University of Wisconsin–Madison. (p. 7)

In 2023 those 11 schools have 46 science libraries – 16 (25%) fewer and making up half of the decrease since 2017. If you add the changes at ARL institutions with three or more science libraries, 90% of the decrease in science libraries is accounted for.

What information are libraries providing explaining these closures and mergers? Thanks to the Wayback Machine archiving library web pages, we can read some libraries stated they returned the building or room(s) to the university to be repurposed (Laherty, 2019) whereas others did not provide any explanation. Dartmouth provided the most detailed answer, explaining closures were “driven by changes in the use of academic libraries, trends in lending, and financial challenges.” Dartmouth’s Dean of Libraries explains,

A decrease in lending does not correspond to a decrease in demand or use of information resources in all formats. Having access to physical materials will continue to be important ... but usage patterns have changed. This provides us with an opportunity to rethink our operations and bring together more of our circulation services as well as integrate collections to manage our physical assets more effectively (Boutwell, 2021, para. 6).

The Chronicle explains closing academic buildings in general is a reality for many campuses, “revenues can be unpredictable, and the cost of building new facilities and maintaining the aging ones continues to rise” (Gardner, 2022, para. 6).

Concluding Observations

In 1983 ARL observed “The growing interdependence of subject fields is one incentive for combining separate units [and that] interdisciplinary collections can more effectively support research into cause and effect relationships that span many subject areas” (Trends and Issues section). Today this trend can be seen in our dataset with the changing of library names ranging from science & engineering to chemistry & biology. Science branch libraries continue to exist in a variety of sizes from a science-specific reference desk in a main library to multi-storied buildings. The roles of science libraries are equally varied as we read about spaces from a recently opened quiet, one-room reading room to floor plans designed to resemble student unions. Renovations and new construction are still occurring also for historic preservation, modernization, and to create “safe, functional, and flexible space[s]” (Cerf, 2022, para. 7; Morgan & Cabada, 2023; Shaw, 2021).

Hiller’s 2004 predictions ring true based on our observations: “Surviving branch libraries will be those ... that provide space that supports student work in a collaborative teaching and learning environment ... [and] will also collaborate with the primary user community” (p. 131). While reviewing ARL library web pages, we saw science libraries promoting and designing for these same services. We believe Scott Carlson (2021) best describes the remaining libraries today, “Libraries are social hubs on campus. They are increasingly the location of classrooms, auditoriums, cafés, makerspaces, virtual-reality rooms, business incubators, and more. And librarians themselves are increasingly reaching patrons outside their walls” (para. 8). This is also observed by Diller and Wallin when they studied how students value the library as place, “the space should provide access to other services or be close to other places of usefulness or importance” (2023, p. 710). As we support our own science library, we note its continued existence is dependent on the campus’ need for space, community, and convenience. We will continue to study and document science libraries as higher education continues to evolve.

References

Association of College and Research Libraries. (1991). ACRL guidelines for branch libraries in colleges and universities. College and Research Libraries News, 52(3), 171–174.

Association of Research Libraries, Office of Management Studies. (1983). Branch libraries in ARL institutions. Systems and Procedures Exchange Center, Association of Research Libraries, Office of Management Studies. https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015010563040&seq=13

Boutwell, S. J. (2021, February 16). Paddock and Kresge Libraries to close. Dartmouth News. https://home.dartmouth.edu/news/2021/02/paddock-and-kresge-libraries-close

Carlson, S. (2021). Academic libraries led universities into the socially distant era. Now they’re planning for what’s next. Chronicle of Higher Education, 67(18), 1–1.

Cerf, E. (2022, November 17). Science & Engineering Library renovation honors leaders, aims to build community among students in STEM. UC Santa Cruz News. https://news.ucsc.edu/2022/11/se-library-renovation.html

Croneis, K., & Short, B. H. (1999). Branch libraries and discrete collections: A SPEC kit. Association of Research Libraries. http://hdl.handle.net/2027/mdp.39015051288317

Diller, K. R., & Wallin, S. B. (2023). Place attachment, libraries, and student preferences. portal: Libraries and the Academy, 23(4), 683–715. https://doi.org/10.1353/pla.2023.a908698

Dionne, R. J. (1988). Science libraries at a crossroads. American Scientist, 76(3), 268–272. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27855184

Doty, C., & Majors, K. (2019). Science library trends at ARL institutions. Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship, 92. https://doi.org/10.29173/istl8

Doty, C., & Majors, K. (2024). Science library trends at ARL institutions (Version 3) [Dataset]. UNC Dataverse. https://doi.org/10.15139/S3/BWX81E

Gardner, L. (2022, February 11). The overbuilt campus. Chronicle of Higher Education, 68(12). https://www.chronicle.com/article/the-overbuilt-campus

Hiller, S. (2004). Measure by measure: Assessing the viability of the physical library. The Bottom Line, 17(4), 126–131. https://doi.org/10.1108/08880450410567400

Laherty, J. (2019, November 13). Life Sciences Library closes Dec. 20, 2019. Indiana University Libraries. https://wayback.archive-it.org/org-72/20191214171334/https://libraries.indiana.edu/life-sciences-library-closes-dec-20-2019

Morgan, K., & Cabada, E. (2023, June 25). Board 93: Collection management in preparation for building restoration: University of Illinois Mathematics Library [Paper presentation]. ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Baltimore MD, United States. https://peer.asee.org/board-93-collection-management-in-preparation-for-building-restoration-university-of-illinois-mathematics-library

Radecki, J., & Springer, R. (2020). Research data services in US higher education: A web-based inventory. Ithaka S+R. https://doi.org/10.18665/sr.314397

Shaw, J. (2021, January-February). “A 500-year building”: Harvard’s new science and engineering complex. Harvard Magazine. https://www.harvardmagazine.com/2020/12/jhj-new-harvard-seas-center

Zdravkovska, N. (2011). Types of branch libraries. In Academic branch libraries in changing times (pp. 25-54). Chandos Publishing.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.