Search

In the past, a member of the public could access an academic library's collection simply by visiting the library in person and browsing the shelves. However, now that online resources are prevalent and represent the majority of collections budgets and current collections, public access has become more complicated. In Canadian academic libraries, licences negotiated for online resources generally allow on-site access for walk-in users; however, access is not granted uniformly across libraries. The goal of this study was to understand whether members of the public are indeed able to access online resources in major Canadian university libraries, whether access to supporting tools is offered, how access is provided, and whether access is monitored or promoted. The study used an online survey that targeted librarians responsible for user services at Canadian Association of Research Libraries (CARL) member libraries. The survey results indicated that some level of free access to digital resources was provided to walk-in users at 90% of libraries for which a survey response was received. However, limitations in methods and modes of access and availability of supporting resources, such as software and printing, varied between the institutions. The study also found that most libraries did not actively promote or monitor non-affiliated user access. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article the authors introduce the Librarians' Research Partnership (LRP), founded in 2013, at McGill and Concordia University Libraries. The Partnership was inspired by the Canadian Association of Research Libraries' Librarians' Research Institute (CARL LRI) which was attended by three of the authors in 2012 and is described here from the point of view of the participants. The authors touch upon the research culture at McGill and Concordia Libraries and discuss barriers and supports for research as prominent themes in the literature on the research role of Canadian academic librarians. The formation of the LRP and the eight subsequent meetings are explained in detail, as well as the factors that made the LRP a successful initiative between the two universities: physical proximity, similarity of working environments, and common organizational culture. The article also includes a discussion of how the LRP's philosophy might diverge from that of the LRI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]