Although they have distinct missions, public libraries and academic libraries serve overlapping populations and can leverage their institutional strengths through collaboration. These diverse partnerships include sharing resources through consortia, joint-use libraries, and shared programming, such as introducing students to public library collections as resources for theses. For the scholarly communication librarian, collaborating with public libraries provides opportunities to educate about the ethical and legal use of information, advocate for the promotion and use of open resources and pedagogies, and interact with communities, particularly in rural areas, that are traditionally underserved by academic libraries. We’ll share two personal examples of the intersection between scholarly communication and public libraries.

In this case study, we reflect on our journey through a major revision of our streaming video reserve guidelines, informed by an environmental scan of comparable library services and current copyright best practices. Once the guidelines were revised, we developed an implementation plan for communicating changes and developing training materials to both instructors and internal library staff. We share our navigation strategies, obstacles faced, lessons learned, and ongoing challenges. Finally, we map out some of our future directions for improving and streamlining our services.

‘Describing at Large Their True and Lively Figure, their several Names, Conditions, Kinds, Virtues (both Natural and Fanciful), Countries of their Species, their Love and Hatred to Humankind, and the wonderful work of Natural Selection in their Evolution, Preservation, and Destruction.

Interwoven with curious variety of Creative Narrations out of Academic Literatures, Scholars, Artists, Scientists, and Poets. Illustrated with diverse Graphics and Emblems both pleasant and profitable for Students of all Faculties and Professions.’

March Mammal Madness is a science outreach project that, over the course of several weeks in March, reaches hundreds of thousands of people in the United States every year. We combine four approaches to science outreach – gamification, social media platforms, community event(s), and creative products – to run a simulated tournament in which 64 animals compete to become the tournament champion. While the encounters between the animals are hypothetical, the outcomes rely on empirical evidence from the scientific literature. Players select their favored combatants beforehand, and during the tournament scientists translate the academic literature into gripping “play-by-play” narration on social media. To date ~1100 scholarly works, covering almost 400 taxa, have been transformed into science stories. March Mammal Madness is most typically used by high-school educators teaching life sciences, and we estimate that our materials reached ~1% of high-school students in the United States in 2019. Here we document the intentional design, public engagement, and magnitude of reach of the project. We further explain how human psychological and cognitive adaptations for shared experiences, social learning, narrative, and imagery contribute to the widespread use of March Mammal Madness.

Purpose: In spring of 2007, Arizona State University Libraries held a focus group of selected faculty to discover their perceptions and use of electronic books (e-books) in their research and teaching.

Methodology/approach: We employed the services of the Institute of Social Sciences Research to recruit and moderate the focus group. The following major themes were explored:
       1) Use of e-books as textbooks.
       2) Use of e-books for personal research.
       3) Comparison between e-books and print.
       4) Disciplinary differences in perceptions of e-books.
       5) Motivators for future use

Findings: Overall, the focus group revealed that faculty had generally unsatisfactory experiences in using e-books in their research and teaching due to the unreliability of access, lack of manipulability, and the steep learning curve of the various interfaces. However, most faculty agreed that e-books would be a very viable and useful alternative if these issues were resolved.

Research limitations/implications: The focus group consisted of only six faculty members and hence is not representative of faculty as a whole. A larger survey of a more diverse faculty population would greatly serve to clarify and expand upon our findings.

Practical implications: The implications for academic libraries include providing better outreach and training to faculty about the e-book platforms offered, provide better course support, and advocate to e-book vendors to consider faculty's teaching and research needs in their product development.

Originality/value of paper: To the best knowledge of the authors, this is the first published study of faculty opinions and use of e-books utilizing focus group methodology and offers detailed information that would be useful for academic libraries and e-book vendors for evidence-based decisions.