587 Mapping Academic Library Contributions to Campus Internationalization Steven W. Witt, Laurie Kutner, and Liz Cooper Steven W. Witt is Associate Professor and Head of the International and Area Studies Library at University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, e-mail: swwitt@illinois.edu; Laurie Kutner is Library Associate Profes- sor in the Information and Instruction Services Department of Bailey/Howe Library at the University of Vermont, e-mail: laurie.kutner@uvm.edu; Liz Cooper is Assistant Professor and Social Sciences Librarian at the University of New Mexico, e-mail: cooperliz@unm.edu. © 2015 Steven W. Witt, Laurie Kutner, and Liz Cooper, Attribution-NonCommercial (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) CC BY-NC. This study surveyed academic libraries across the United States to es- tablish baseline data on their contributions to campus internationalization. Supplementing data from the American Council on Education (ACE) on internationalization of higher education, this research measured the level of international activities taking place in academic libraries and their role in campus internationalization efforts. The results of this study indicated that responding libraries contribute broadly to campus internationalizing efforts yet trail campuses in strategic planning and organizational sup- port. Based on analysis of the results in comparison with ACE data, the authors provide suggestions for further library initiatives and research that focuses on international and global learning activities. nternationalization and global education have become important strategies within higher education to prepare students for productive citizenship in an increasingly globalized world. This focus on internationalization has been precipitated by a number of factors including the acceleration of a global economy, rapid advances in information and communication technologies that facilitate the production and transmission of knowledge, and the drive to address global chal- lenges such as poverty, health, security, and the environment. Additionally, continued success in research and development output necessitates international collaboration. There is widespread recognition among higher education leaders that students must be prepared for productive international engagement and leadership to navigate the complexities of the contemporary world. Much has been written about what this means specifically within the context of U.S. higher education and how to strategically work toward achieving global competence and engagement in our students and institutions.1 To gain a better understanding of how colleges and universities have been address- ing this need, in 2001 the American Council on Education (ACE), a leader in higher education, instituted the Mapping Internationalization on U.S. Campuses project, survey- ing U.S. colleges and universities, to “assess the current state of internationalization at institutions, examine progress and trends over time, and identify priorities going doi:10.5860/crl.76.5.587 crl14-619 588 College & Research Libraries July 2015 forward.”2 ACE executed the survey again in 2006 and in 2011. The ACE survey “is the only comprehensive source of data on internationalization in U.S. higher education institutions from all sectors and … assess[es] many aspects of campus international- ization, including: articulated institutional commitment; administrative structure and staffing; curriculum, co-curriculum and learning outcomes; faculty policies and prac- tices; student mobility; collaboration and partnerships.”3 Although many definitions of “internationalization” have been offered, this study uses the ACE survey definition, “broadly referring to institutional efforts to integrate an international, global and/or intercultural dimension into the teaching, research or services function.”4 Though the ACE survey attempts to provide a comprehensive view of campus internationalization, academic libraries are excluded. Academic libraries, however, have a long history of engaging in international projects and programs, ranging from support of the profession’s growth abroad to campus support for research, curricula, and student services, including: foreign language collections, international partnerships and library exchange programs, support for research and study abroad, and services for international students. This study models the ACE survey to: 1) supplement the established data collected by ACE on internationalization policies and practices of U.S. colleges and universi- ties by focusing on academic library contributions, 2) compare the results of the two surveys to understand the relationship between library and campus internationaliza- tion activity, 3) contribute to a deeper understanding of the extent to which academic libraries are engaged in internationalization activities, and 4) consider opportunities for future research in this area. Literature Review Although academic libraries have a substantive role to play in supporting increasing internationalization efforts on campuses, the higher education literature on interna- tionalization generally does not include the library.5 However, the academic library literature demonstrates the long-term involvement of libraries in campus internation- alization activities, though not typically framed as such until recently. Higher Education and Comprehensive Internationalization The ACE report indicated that the process of strategic and coordinated comprehensive internationalization “requires a clear commitment by top-level institutional leaders, meaningfully impacts the curriculum and a broad range of people, policies, and programs, and results in deep and ongoing incorporation of international perspec- tives and activities throughout the institution.”6 Comprehensive internationalization is viewed as transformative, requiring broad support across campuses. Achieving comprehensive internationalization, according to the ACE report, “requires careful planning, resources, and a sustained commitment that starts with top leadership and permeates the institution.”7 Similarly, Green and Olsen, in their heavily cited 2003 publication, Internationalizing the Campus: A User’s Guide, describe four elements es- sential to comprehensive internationalization: “leadership, resources, organizational structures, and partnerships.”8 Though the library is largely omitted from the higher education literature on comprehensive internationalization, Green and Olson make clear that libraries have a foundational role to play in these efforts. NAFSA Association for International Educators is the primary national organiza- tion that focuses on both international students coming to the United States and U.S. students studying abroad. However, NAFSA’s guide to education abroad for advisors and administrators neglects to mention the role of either the home or host institution library for students engaged in research abroad.9 In their recent publication on com- Mapping Academic Library Contributions to Campus Internationalization 589 prehensive internationalization, the library is only briefly noted as an example of a support unit that should work with international students.10 More recently, internationalization literature includes a focus on assessment and measurement of these efforts on college campuses.11 For example, Terry Rodenberg developed an assessment instrument that focused on the broad areas of institutional resources, administration, institutional philosophy, faculty support and opportunities, curriculum, marketing and communication, and student support.12 Notably absent, however, is inclusion of the role of foundational services such as libraries and writing centers. Themes of Internationalization in the Academic Library Literature In the academic library literature, a rich engagement with internationalization-related themes is evident and growing. Some of the themes explored in the literature include working with international students, information literacy, supporting study-abroad students/programs, international branch campuses, LIS education, library staff ex- changes, and collection development. The overarching theme of internationalization efforts and the academic library has also been examined. Becker describes the Australian context of higher education and notes that, with strategic planning, library leadership, and budgetary support, academic library participation in internationalization trends are evident.13 In “Inter- nationalization and the North American University Library,” Bordonaro frames her study of international student and scholar use of academic libraries within the context of internationalization.14 Her findings indicate that librarians, international students, and international scholars overwhelmingly see a role for the library in international- ization efforts. However, she also notes a general absence of the library in university strategic internationalization plans, and “the literature of higher education in general … has not specifically considered or mentioned the role of the university library in internationalization.”15 There is a clear opportunity for library support of campus inter- nationalization to be incorporated more fully into the general higher education dialog. According to Dewey, within the global knowledge context, the success of academic/ research libraries in the future will require emphasis on collaboration and partnering both within and beyond the university.16 Beyond the general theme of libraries and campus internationalization, the library literature related to internationalization focuses on the resources and services librar- ies provide. Most notably, a substantive body of literature addresses library support for international students. Davis provides a chronological annotated bibliography of this literature.17 Peters’ bibliographic essay notes that the literature in this area began to proliferate in the 1980s.18 Jackson and Sullivan provide a collection of case studies focusing on innovative ways in which academic libraries support international stu- dents.19 Recent articles on international students and academic libraries include themes of: research process and plagiarism workshops, university international partnerships and the role of libraries, information literacy, LibGuides as tools for international stu- dents, and understanding the unique needs of international and ESL students from a broadly cultural perspective.20 A body of literature on library support for study-abroad students has also recently been developed. For example, in 2008, ARL published a SPEC kit examining how ARL libraries support these students.21 Additionally, Denda and Kutner, studying university students, both found that students had a general lack of awareness about using their home institution libraries while studying abroad.22 Relatedly, Cohen and Burkhardt consider alternative modes of communication to provide reference services for students studying abroad.23 590 College & Research Libraries July 2015 Library support of international branch campuses is also increasingly documented. Green examines library service provision at international branch campuses, providing insight into the challenges these libraries face.24 She indicates that collaboration with the home institution is important, which is echoed by Brown and Barr-Walker.25 Col- laboration to build collections at international branch campus libraries is discussed by Smith and support for information literacy at international branch campuses of a U.K. institution is discussed by Coombs.26 Abdullah, Kajberg, and Virkus discuss the importance of developing LIS curricula consistent with the principles of internationalization including integrating more in- ternational/global content into courses, increasing international students, and creating opportunities for LIS students to have international education experiences.27 Griner and Herron provide an example of a library school international service-learning, community-based program.28 Kidd and Roughton note in their 1994 study that international library staff exchanges are often documented in the literature as personal stories or case studies of “how we did it.”29 As many current articles on staff exchanges demonstrate, this is still the case today.30 Although some of these articles may also take a comparative perspective and document the differences discovered between libraries during exchanges, studies that assess the impact of exchanges are more rare.31 Other internationalization-related themes present in the literature include col- lection development of international materials to support curricula and digitization and access to global information.32 As Dewey and others note, global research trends require knowledge of and access to materials from other countries, and it is the role of the research library to support university global initiatives and international research collaborations.33 As the literature review suggests, librarians support increasingly global study and research and are well positioned to support trends in campus internationalization. The overall scope of this support across academic libraries, however, is less established. Methods To measure the level at which academic libraries in the United States support campus internationalization objectives, the authors conducted a survey of libraries and compiled aggregate results based primarily upon degree-granting status. With the approval of ACE, the authors adopted the methodology employed in the 2012 Mapping Interna- tionalization on U.S. Campuses survey. The goal was to both compare libraries to the overall results of the ACE survey and develop a better understanding of the extent to which academic libraries engage in international activities. Although the ACE survey included all colleges and universities, the academic library survey focused on four-year institutions and above. The research team invited 1,580 U.S. academic libraries, from bachelor’s to doctoral-level institutions, for which there was at least one valid e-mail address for the library or library director, to participate. The survey was addressed to library directors or their equivalents to complete via an online instrument. The 38-item survey consisted of both closed and open-ended questions divided into the following subsections: Institutional Information, Library Commitment, Organi- zational Structure and Staffing, Internationalizing Collections and Services, Financial Support, Faculty Policies and Opportunities, and Internationalization as a Focus. These subsections and the survey items were adopted from equivalent or similar sections in the ACE survey to reflect the specific services and structures found in academic librar- ies. In preparing the survey, the researchers consulted with the University of Illinois’ Survey Research Laboratory, which helped to construct the survey items in a manner that provided clear language while ensuring that pertinent data would be gathered. Mapping Academic Library Contributions to Campus Internationalization 591 Survey responses were individually anonymous yet prompted responding libraries to provide their institution’s Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) number.34 IPEDS are maintained by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), which maintains a system of interrelated surveys conducted annually. Being able to link survey responses to IPEDS data allowed the research team to analyze results based upon degree-granting status. In addition, respondents had the option to include contact information for a planned follow-up study that will focus upon qualitative interviews. Using IPEDS data, the research team developed a contact list based upon publicly available e-mail addresses. As in the ACE study, institutions were not sampled ran- domly but were surveyed in total to provide a census of library internationalization activities across the United States. In March 2013, e-mail invitations were sent to library directors. Follow-up invitations and reminders were sent to nonrespondents, and the survey concluded in early May 2013. Some organizations, such as the Association of Research Libraries and the American Library Association, also reposted the survey announcement via e-mail listservs. Results and Discussion A total of 1,580 valid contacts received surveys. Invalid contacts included 224 university libraries for which there was no publicly available contact in- formation or the listed e-mail addresses elicited error messages. Overall, 202 institutions completed the survey for a response rate of 13 percent among valid contacts. When broken down by type of institution, response rates differed, with the largest variation between doctoral (25%) and both bachelor’s (6%) and master’s (11%) degree granting institutions. The resulting sample provides a data- set in which responses from bachelor’s and master’s institutions are underrepresented (see table 1). The results are therefore presented descriptively without an attempt to generalize across institution types and beyond the responding institutions. Underrepresentation within the sample suggests that there is a potential for bias among the responding institutions. Using IPEDS data, other criteria were used to determine whether or not certain types of institutions within the university community responded to the survey at differing rates. For example, 98 percent of the 217 for-profit institution libraries were nonrespondents. On the other end of the spectrum, libraries from universities described through IPEDS data as having high to very high research activity completed surveys at a rate of 32 percent. When universities were viewed based upon the percent of international student enrollment, other patterns emerged. The overall population of universities reported an average of 3 percent international student enrollment. Among respondents, however, the average international student enrollment was 5 percent of the total student body (see table 2). This suggests that there may be bias within the responding population toward institutions with international student enrollments in the top quartile and greater campus research output. In addition, it suggests that higher response rates among other institution types would potentially yield differing overall results. The people who completed the surveys overwhelmingly represent leadership posi- tions within their libraries; University Librarians or Library Directors accounted for 75 percent, Associate University Librarians equaled 14 percent, and librarians or the library’s international officer represented the remaining 12 percent. TABLE 1 Responding Institutions % in Frame* % Complete Bachelor’s 44% (791) 6% (51) Master’s 40% (719) 11% (78) Doctoral 16% (294) 25% (73) *Frame size is based on IPEDS data for bachelor’s, master’s, and doctoral institutions in the United States. 592 College & Research Libraries July 2015 Library Commitment and Focus on Internationalization Libraries’ articulated commitment to internationalization was measured by identifying the extent to which international education and global learning are included in mission statements, strategic plans, and committee work within the library and on campus. Five questions asked whether internationalization was included in the library’s mission statement, the extent to which internationalization is a priority in strategic planning, whether the library has a discrete plan for library internationalization, whether the library has a committee charged wholly or in part with internationalization activities, and whether the library is included in campuswide internationalization committees. Overall, a preponderance of libraries in each category indicated that their mission statements do not refer to internationalization, with only 13 percent of bachelor’s, 12 percent of master’s, and 17 percent of doctoral-supporting libraries responding affir- matively. However, a higher percentage (44%) reported including internationalization in their strategic plans, with libraries from doctoral institutions reporting the highest percentage of inclusion (56%) (see figure 1). In regard to committees, only 2 percent of libraries reported that they have specific committees or task forces that focus on internationalization. A higher proportion of all responding libraries have committees FIGURE 1 Internationalization within Library Strategic Plan 0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% Among Top 5 Priorities In Plan, But Not Among Top 5 Not in Plan No Strategic Plan Exists Bachelor's (n=24) Master's (n=74) Doctoral (n=97) TABLE 2 Full-frame vs. Response & Percent International Student Population % International Students within Full Frame of 1,822 % International Students among Completed Surveys Mean 3.40% Mean 5.06% Percentiles 25 0.45% Percentiles 25 1.30% 50 1.73% 50 3.08% 75 4.51% 75 6.74% Mapping Academic Library Contributions to Campus Internationalization 593 with internationalization as part of their charge (14%), with libraries from doctoral institutions reporting an even higher percentage (20%). Libraries reported higher lev- els of participation in campus committees (41%), with a higher percentage of doctoral institutions (48%) including libraries in these committees (see figure 2). To measure the focus or intensity of work in internationalizing activities, respondents were asked a series of questions about the level and motives for actual internationaliza- tion work undertaken—as opposed to planned work—by the library in the past three years (academic years 2009/10 to 2011/12). Three quarters of respondents indicated that their library is not a leader in the area of internationalization; almost half (48%) of these respondents reported that their library’s level of internationalization is not high at all. However, slightly over two-thirds of respondents reported that internationalization activities have increased in recent years (see figures 3 and 4). Libraries supporting doctoral work more often stated that activities had increased in recent years, with 77 percent reporting a rise in internationalization activities. To gauge motives, libraries were asked to select the principal catalysts spurring inter- nationalization initiatives in the library. Across institution types, no clear individual or role emerged as the primary catalyst for international activities within libraries. Overall, library directors were selected 37 percent of the time by respondents (who were primarily library directors) as the principal catalysts for internationalization (see figure 5). Analysis by institution type revealed that only PhD institutions were more likely to report that the following leadership positions acted as principal catalysts for internationalization within libraries: University Presidents/CEO (29%), Chief Academic Officers (30%), Senior Interna- tional Officers (19%), Library Directors (45%), and Heads of Collections (18%). Respondents also indicated other catalysts, such as the community, librarians in nonadministrative positions, boards of directors, state leaders, alumni, funders, and foreign visitors. FIGURE 2 Library Representation on Campuswide Committee for Internationalization 0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% Yes No No Such Committees Exist Bachelor's (n=24) Master's (n=71) Doctoral (n=98) 594 College & Research Libraries July 2015 FIGURE 3 Library’s Level of Internationalization 0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% Extremely High Very High Moderately High Slightly High Not High at All Bachelor's (n=24) Master's (n=74) Doctoral (n=97) FIGURE 4 Change in Library’s Internationalization Activities over Three Years (Academic Years 2009–10 to 2011–12) 0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0% 90.0% Increased Decreased No Change Bachelor's (n=23) Master's (n=74) Doctoral (n=97) Mapping Academic Library Contributions to Campus Internationalization 595 The researchers also asked an open-ended question regarding motivations for in- creasing internationalization-related initiatives in libraries in recent years. It elucidated a variety of responses with identifiable recurring themes. A total of 103 colleges and universities responded to this question, including 20 bachelor’s level, 40 master’s level, and 43 doctoral-level institutions. Across all libraries, the most frequent motivation was to support wider campus internationalization initiatives and institutional priori- ties. Indicative of this was the statement by one respondent: “We follow the lead of the campus and offer services that meet the programmatic needs of the campus. As the campus starts to develop international programs, we work to support those endeavors.” The next most frequent response theme related to supporting increasing numbers of international students and study-abroad programs. Also noted as motivators were support for changing curricula, including global learning initiatives and new programs, and an increased emphasis on foreign languages. A less common, though repeated, theme focused on proactive initiatives due to interests and expertise of individual librarians and library deans and directors. Additionally, three doctoral-supporting libraries mentioned support for international campuses as a motivating force. Another question asked respondents to identify the four most compelling reasons why their libraries were focusing on internationalization. In addition to the themes addressed above, numerous responses across institution types focused on today’s inherently global world and the need to, as one respondent describes it, “prepare our graduates to lead and thrive in a global society.” Relatedly, many libraries reported the importance of access to global information and the role of libraries in facilitating this, as well as the role of libraries in supporting cultural diversity and diversity of perspectives through knowledge and information. While the respondent libraries are overwhelmingly engaged with supporting their campus internationalization efforts in myriad ways, a few respondents indicated no specific focus in this area. Organizational Structure and Staffing As noted in the ACE report, “appropriate administrative structures and staffing form the framework for successful implementation” of organizational efforts.35 To determine the extent to which libraries provide coordinated oversight to implement and support FIGURE 5 Principle Catalysts of Internationalization in Library 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 Bachelor's Ch ief A ca de m ic O� ce r Se ni or In te rn at io na l O � ce r (n=24) Master's (n=74) Doctoral (n=98) 596 College & Research Libraries July 2015 internationalization efforts, four questions focused on determining the extent of staff activities, administrative structure, and reporting lines for duties related to interna- tionalization efforts within the university library. Respondents were asked to select each of the listed internationalization-related activities that applied to their institutions. Figure 6 reports the results; the most fre- quently mentioned activities include liaising to foreign language and area/international studies departments, providing orientations specific to international students, and collecting international and foreign language materials. Among activities not noted above, over half of the doctoral-supporting libraries reported having staff focused on international interlibrary loan and outreach to campus and community on interna- tional topics. Other activities such as administering international partnerships were less represented in the survey. Respondents also reported a number of activities not prompted by the survey. These include developing international curricula, leading study-abroad programs, advising international students, and working internationally with donors to raise funds. Administratively, university libraries report a fairly unstructured leadership in regard to internationalization activities with a majority of respondents reporting that leadership in this area emanated from either “multiple” or “no particular individual or units” (see figure 7). In terms of reporting lines, individuals whose duties include internationalization activities report mainly to library deans and directors. Again, there is a difference reported by libraries from PhD institutions, with staff engaged in internationalization more likely to report to unit heads than in the other two types of institutions (see figure 8). FIGURE 6 Aspects of Internationalization Supported by Library Faculty/Staff 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Bachelor's (n=24) Master's (n=74) Doctoral (n=98) In t’l St ud en t I ns tru ct io n/ Or ien ta tio n Ou tre ac h on In t’l To pi cs Lia iso n to Fo re ig n La ng ua ge D ep ts. Lia iso n to A re a S tu di es /In t’l St ud ies Lia iso n to ES L P ro gr am Lia iso n to Ed uc at io n/ St ud y A br oa d Ac ce ss to Fo re ig n La ng ua ge th ro ug h In t’l Re fe re nc e In t’l In te rli br ar y L oa n an d Le nd in g In t’l /G lo ba l L ib ra ry Pr og ra m m in g In t’l an d Fo re ig n La ng ua ge C ol lec tio ns De ve lo pi ng /M on ito rin g In t’l Pa rtn er sh ip s Su pp or tin g In t’l Br an ch C am pu s(e s) Ot he r Mapping Academic Library Contributions to Campus Internationalization 597 Internationalizing Collections and Services The library survey’s section on internationalizing collections and services focused on measuring library contributions to curricular and learning outcomes that support re- search and teaching, including support for courses on global trends, foreign languages, and cocurricular resources and activities that enhance student learning. Questions in this survey section focused on collections supporting international and area studies, services for English as a Second Language (ESL) students and international students, and library instruction in support of international initiatives. Categories for these questions were derived from activities reported in the library literature. FIGURE 7 Administrative Structure of Internationalization Activities 0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 25.0% 30.0% 35.0% 40.0% Single Individual Multiple Individuals with Cross- unit Coordination Multiple Individuals, Independent No Particular Individual or Unit Not Applicable Other Bachelor's (n=22) Master's (n=71) Doctoral (n=98) FIGURE 8 Reporting Line of Individuals Whose Duties Include Internationalizing Activities 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Library Dean/Director Head of Library Collections Head of Library Services Unit Head Other Bachelor's (n=24) Master's (n=74) Doctoral (n=98) 598 College & Research Libraries July 2015 All respondents were asked to select their library’s offerings from among a list of programs, services, and instructional activities related to international students and international learning objectives (see figure 9). The responses demonstrate that librar- ies emphasize services such as individualized research support, guides for traditional curricular offerings such as language and area studies, and services for international students. Fewer services and resources are focused on activities such as study abroad, ESL programming, or teaching internationally related content. The trend to support curricular activities is also reflected in figure 6, where staff resources are more aligned toward work that supports curricular rather than cocurricular elements of campus internationalization. With regard to collections, libraries from doctoral institutions are more likely to have a collection plan that includes specific regions and languages than libraries from institutions whose highest degrees are at the master’s or bachelor’s levels. As figure 10 displays, regional emphasis on collections is spread fairly evenly across responding institutions with Latin America, North and East Asia, the Middle East, and Western Europe noted most often within collection plans. Languages collected follow these regional patterns. Taken as a whole, the mean number of regions, languages, services, and activities were compared across institution types. Table 3 indicates that libraries from doctoral institutions have a higher number of countries/regions and languages in their collection plan and also offer more programs and activities. Given the breadth of research and instructional offerings, it is clear that libraries at doctoral institutions are required to provide broad support for research collections and programs. In regard to support for FIGURE 9 Total Responses by Specific Service Program, Resource, and Instructional Activity 0 50 100 150 Teach in Global Themed Courses Teach on Global Information Instruction for Study Abroad Courses Instruction for ESLCourses Instruction for International Students Guides For Int’l/area Studies Guides For Foreign Language Courses Guides for Study Abroad Guides For ESL Guides for Int’l Students Individualized Research Services for Int’l Students Specialized Orientation for Int’l Students Foreign Language Tours Bachelor's (N=24) Master's (N=74) Doctoral (N=97) Mapping Academic Library Contributions to Campus Internationalization 599 services and instruction, however, libraries from bachelor’s and master’s institutions reported totals much closer to the overall mean. This indicates a wider presence of services related to campus internationalization across institutions despite clear differ- ences in collecting practices. FIGURE 10 Frequency with Which Regions Reported in Collection Development Plans North and East Asia, 26 South Asia, 22 South East Asia, 20 Middle East and North Africa, 25 Sub-Saharan Africa, 16 Russia, 20 Eastern Europe, 18 Central Asia, 14 Western Europe, 25 Canada, 11 Latin America and the Caribbean, 29 Oceania, 5 TABLE 3 Mean Number of Regions, Languages, Programs, and Activities by Highest Degree Awarded Highest Degree Awarded on Campus Number of Countries/ Regions Collection Development Plan Targets* Number of Languages Represented in Collection Development Plan† Number of Programs/ Support Services For Int’l Students‡ Number of Info Literacy And Instruction Activities§ Bachelor's Mean .63 .54 .88 2.63 N 24 24 24 24 Master's Mean .64 1.04 1.18 3.14 N 74 74 74 74 Doctoral Mean 1.67 2.64 1.52 4.50 N 98 98 98 98 Total Mean 1.15 1.78 1.31 3.76 N 196 196 196 196 *F(2, 196) = 8.33, p = .044; †F(2, 196) = 18.173, p = .017; ‡F(2, 196) = 5.107, p = .001; §F(2, 193) = 6.792, p = .000 600 College & Research Libraries July 2015 Financial Support Another indicator of commitment to internationalization is the source of funding and level of professional support provided for activities. Overall, 16 percent of respondents received internal funding from the campus to support international activities. Of all institution types, libraries from doctoral institutions are more likely to have received internal funding in the past three years (25%). Although libraries from doctoral institu- tions also reported receiving external funding from more sources (see table 4), most FIGURE 11 Sources of External Funding (n=196) Federal govt 12% State govt 2% Alumni 7% Private donors 9% Foundations 12% Corporations 3% No external funding received 53% Other 2% TABLE 4 Mean Sources of Funding and Funded Aspects of Internationalization by Highest Degree Awarded Highest Degree Awarded on Campus # of Sources of External Funding in Past 3 Years* # of Aspects of Int’l Services Funded in Previous Year† # of Professional Opportunities for Staff in Last 3 Years‡ Bachelor's Mean .21 .25 .29 N 24 24 24 Master's Mean .15 .76 .28 N 74 74 74 Doctoral Mean .94 2.80 .69 N 98 98 98 Total Mean .55 1.71 .49 N 196 196 196 *F(2, 196) = 1.134, p = .000; †F(2, 196) = 6.062, p = .000; ‡F(2, 196) = .636, p = .002 Mapping Academic Library Contributions to Campus Internationalization 601 FIGURE 13 Professional Development Opportunities with International Focus 0 50 100 150 Workshops: Int’l Trends in Librarianship Workshops: Technology to Enhance Int’l Collaboratoin Workshops: Cross-cultural Communication Opportunities to Improve Language Skills No Int’l Professional Development Other Opportunities Bachelor's (N=24) Master's (N=74) Doctoral (N=98) institutions reported no external funding (see figure 11). Following a similar trend, libraries at doctoral institutions also report more frequent staff support for aspects of internationalization and professional development activities than the other two types (see figures 12 and 13). In particular, libraries from doctoral institutions are more likely to sponsor workshops on international trends in librarianship and support international travel to meetings and professional activities. FIGURE 12 Library Funding for Professional Activities 0 50 100 Travel to Int’l Book Fairs Travel for Int’l Book Buying Trips Collections Funding for Int’l Travel Host Visiting Int’l Librarians Teach/Serve in Institutions Abroad Lead Students on Study Abroad Travel to Meetings Abroad Study/conduct Research Abroad Participate in Int’l Projects Develop Seminars Abroad Foster Int’l Agreements No Funding for Int’l Other Int’l Activities Bachelor's (N=24) Master's (N=74) Doctoral (N=98) 602 College & Research Libraries July 2015 Perspectives of Library Administrators The ACE survey concludes that strong administrative support is necessary to sustain international initiatives. To explore the role of library administrators, the survey in- cluded two open-ended questions. The first asked respondents to describe the ways in which upper-level library administration are involved in internationalization initiatives at the university committee/governance level. A total of 117 institutions provided responses to this question, including libraries at 28 bachelor’s, 45 master’s, and 44 doctoral institutions. Responses were analyzed for general trends. Strikingly, it was noted that across all levels of institutions there was a high level of variability in the ways upper-level library administration interfaced with university administration dependent upon institutional initiatives regarding internationalization, institutional administrative structure, and institutional culture regarding the library. Of the 28 bachelor’s institutions that responded to this question, nine indicated no involvement with campus internationalization activities at the university administrative level. Other respondents who indicated a high level of involvement reported a range of institutional-level administrative planning activities, including: direct responsibility for creating the college’s strategic plan and college policy decisions, active conversations with deans regarding need for library support for international programs, membership in internationalization-related committees, membership on college dean’s committee where internationalization is discussed, and work with various programs that support study-abroad and international students. Of the 45 master’s institutions that responded, ten indicated no involvement in internationalization-related initiatives at the institutional level, and a few expressed frustration at this. The respondents that indicated involvement described activities such as serving on university leadership teams; developing and maintaining relationships with potential partner international institutions; facilitating international exchange programs with partner institutions including sister library programs; and engaging with university international student and study-abroad offices, including two library directors who identified themselves as having led short-term study-abroad programs at their institutions. Of the 44 doctoral institutions that responded, six indicated no involvement in internationalization-related initiatives at the institutional level. As reflected in the results described in figure 2 above, more direct involvement on university committees focusing on global engagement was expressed by libraries at doctoral institutions. Again, there were numerous expressions of strong involvement in internationalization- related strategic discussions, as participants in university leadership teams, including library support of new global and international curricula, new internationally focused general education requirements, and international partnerships. The second open-ended question asked respondents to describe the potential they see for further, future engagement by the library in internationalization and global education efforts on their campuses. A total of 113 institutions responded to this ques- tion, including 28 bachelor’s, 42 master’s, and 43 doctoral institutions. Of the 28 libraries from baccalaureate institutions that responded to this question, five indicated no or limited potential for further engagement by the library in inter- nationalization-related support, citing reasons such as limited staffing and resources. Other respondents indicated potential for future library engagement in areas such as: support for international students (including information literacy instruction, bilin- gual instruction, library guides, individual research support, collection development of materials for ESL learners); further support and involvement with study-abroad programs; building collections of foreign language materials and materials to support global curricula. Mapping Academic Library Contributions to Campus Internationalization 603 Of the 42 libraries from master’s institutions that responded, 8 indicated an uncer- tainty about further engagement in this area, citing need for increased funding and staffing, enrollment dependence, and strategic initiatives set by upper-level university administration. In addition to areas of future engagement mentioned above, this group cited a wider range of future possibilities than the baccalaureate-level respondents, including potential for increased international library staff exchanges, greater emphasis in the library strategic plan, additional support for international university partner- ships, and proactive outreach to international students. Of the 43 libraries from doctoral institutions that responded, only one indicated uncertainty about further future engagement in this area, and this was because of the already high level of involvement by their library. Three libraries from doctoral institutions specifically reported a need for increased funding to support growth of initiatives in this area. Generally, the comments of respondents in this group mirrored the comments by respondents from bachelor’s and master’s institutions regarding po- tential future engagement in support of internationalization. However, libraries at these larger-scale institutions also indicated more engagement with international institutions. This included aspects such as expanding international university partnerships and collaboration with international libraries as well as expanding research initiatives, de- veloping international research centers, and growing international digitization projects. The complexities of libraries at large-scale institutions supporting internationalization efforts were elucidated by one respondent from this group: The library is uniquely positioned to contribute to and, in fact, to lead internation- alization efforts on campus. Our work is, by its very definition, international. By that I mean: both scholarship and publication are global. Discovery, access, and fulfillment necessarily cross geopolitical boundaries. So we daily experience and enable international peer-reviewed data, information and knowledge exchanges. The challenge is moving from facilitators of authoritative knowledge exchanges into the knowledge creation processes. This can take the form of serving on international grant-funded teams, given our expertise in, for instance, data creation. Or our new roles could place us in classrooms as co-teachers of discipline based inquiry, which draws ideas and inspirations from the international scholarly ecosystem. We must also ensure that we maintain a diversity of perspectives in our collections, reflec- tive of the increasing diversity of our campus constituencies. Relatedly, we must purposefully extend our collective cultural competencies so as to assure all campus stakeholders feel welcomed and enabled in our virtual spaces and physical places. Comparing the ACE Survey and Library Survey Comparing the results of the ACE Mapping Internationalization on U.S. Campuses: 2012 survey and the results of this survey is useful in considering the role libraries play in campus internationalization. There is much convergence in library and campus activities and structures related to internationalization, but there are also striking dif- ferences. Like the library survey (see table 1), the ACE survey enjoyed a much higher participation rate among doctoral institutions (60%) with similarly decreasing rates of completion by master’s (40%) and bachelor’s (27%) level institutions. Both surveys found a higher level of internationalization activity at doctoral institutions than at other types of academic institutions and academic libraries. Most likely, the high level of internationalization activity at doctoral institutions has driven the corresponding high level of activity at libraries serving doctoral-level institutions as they work to support their parent institutions. 604 College & Research Libraries July 2015 In addition, both the ACE survey and the library survey report an increase in internationalization activity and funding, displaying optimism that this trend will continue. Further, both surveys report that commitment to internationalization from top-level organizational leaders is a key driver. Libraries tend to identify library directors as principal catalysts while institutions reported the President or CEO in this role. Clearly library directors and campus leaders are important to setting the necessary institutional tone to ensure initiatives are well supported and promoted strategically. One of the most striking differences in the surveys is the reported level of interna- tionalization in libraries and on campuses. In the ACE survey, 56 percent of the overall respondents and 95 percent of the doctoral institutions indicated that international- ization had been “high” or “moderate” in recent years. Only 30 percent of academic libraries and 39 percent of the libraries serving doctoral institutions, however, reported high to moderately high levels of internationalization (see figure 3). Although inter- nationalization activity has increased in responding libraries, explicit articulation of it in planning documents often has not occurred. Further, less than 20 percent of libraries that responded include internationalization among the top five priorities in their strategic plans (see figure 1), while 52 percent of campuses in the ACE survey include it as a top priority. These results suggest that the organizational priorities and levels of international activities within libraries differ considerably from trends in internationalization expressed in the ACE survey. Further review of the results, however, suggests that, despite disparities in articula- tion and emphasis, libraries are active contributors to campuswide internationalization efforts. For example, libraries are represented well at the institutional level on inter- nationalization committees. ACE reported that only 44 percent of institutions have campuswide internationalization committees, and nearly 40 percent of libraries report being included on these campus level committees (see figure 2). These percentages and the evidence presented through the responses to the library survey’s open-ended questions suggest that libraries are often included in campuswide internationalization planning when it does take place. The ACE survey reports that many campuses have offices for coordinating inter- national activities and that 40 percent of all institutions have a full-time professional overseeing these activities. However, most libraries report that there is no particular person or unit in charge of overseeing international-related activities in the library, though most units working in this area report to the library director (see figures 7 and 8). Obviously, the level of coordination required to manage international activities across a campus is much greater than it is in one unit such as a library. However, the fact that most libraries do not coordinate these activities demonstrates a lack of focus on internationalization in libraries. In supporting international professional development, the ACE survey reports a slight downturn from 2006 to 2011 in the percentage of institutions offering funding for this type of activity. Even with this decline, 48 percent of all academic institutions report that they did support international conference travel (the most common inter- national professional development activity) for faculty in 2011. The library survey reported that 31 percent of all libraries financially support librarian attendance at international conferences, though this is heavily skewed toward doctoral institutions (60%) as compared to bachelor’s institutions (4%). It is also interesting to note that 46 percent of all libraries reported no funding for any aspect of international professional development (see figures 12 and 13). The downward trend in support for this type of professional development at the institutional level, if it continues, will most likely have a corresponding effect in libraries. Mapping Academic Library Contributions to Campus Internationalization 605 In terms of trends in services and programs related to internationalization, the ACE survey demonstrated that a growing number of institutions devote resources to study abroad, international student recruitment, and joint and branch international campuses. As figures 6 and 9 reveal, libraries are involved, to varying degrees, in providing resources and services to support these initiatives. The ACE study, how- ever, reported that, though activities such as international student recruitment have increased, an increase in corresponding support services to these students has not. Libraries could potentially focus on developing their existing service base to address the campus-level need to support international students. Libraries across all levels of institutions, however, indicated a need for financial and human resources to increase support for campus internationalization. According to ACE, the number of institutions with globally focused general educa- tion requirements has increased. However, although the majority of academic institu- tions have a foreign language graduation requirement, the number of institutions with this requirement has steadily decreased since 2001. The ACE report raises the question of whether this trend toward globally focused general education requirements and away from foreign language coursework is displacing depth for breadth. The library survey, on the other hand, demonstrates that library commitment to foreign language collections and support of area studies programs—two areas that have been a tradi- tional focus of international activity in libraries—continue to be strong (see figures 6 and 10). In fact, in the library survey’s open-ended questions, librarians state that one motivator for increasing internationalization activity is increased emphasis on foreign languages at the institutional level. So, while the ACE survey reported a downward trend in foreign language requirements, perhaps this library response reflects the additional ACE finding that there has been an increase in language training related to languages considered important for national strategic interests such as Arabic and Chinese. Whether libraries will respond to the institutional shift in focus away from general foreign language training at some point in the future or remain the bastion of foreign language and area studies collections and support activities on campus remains to be seen. Conclusion This project was undertaken to provide a foundation for understanding in a system- atized manner the extent to which academic libraries are involved in international- ization efforts. It was conducted in response to the lack of articulation in the general higher education dialog regarding the academic library’s myriad roles in supporting campus internationalization. It bears mention that a similar absence with regard to the lack of inclusion of libraries’ roles in campus strategic initiatives has been noted earlier, as evidenced in studies done by the National Resource Center for the First-Year Experience.36 Developing a further understanding of the complexities of reasons for lack of recognized fundamental integration of libraries into campus strategic initiatives requires a separate call for focused and detailed research. As a starting point for documenting or “mapping” library contributions to campus internationalization, this project has succeeded. It has provided a baseline from which the academic library community can more fully understand both the breadth and depth of library contributions to campus internationalization efforts. By adapting the ACE “Mapping Internationalization” survey, there is a common language from which to articulate to the higher education community the extent of library contributions to campus internationalization and new roles that libraries can play. The ACE survey has been administered three times to colleges and universities across the United States (2001, 2006, 2011). As a first attempt at a national library survey on 606 College & Research Libraries July 2015 campus internationalization, the response rates have been lower than ACE surveys. Although the data from bachelor’s and master’s institutions are not generalizable, they do provide insights into commonalities and differences in the ways in which different types of institutions engage with campus internationalization, which can be further analyzed and articulated with future research. Response rates from doctoral- level institutions allow for a stronger baseline of generalizable information to inform future, more focused research. Though reasons for low response rates may be varied, it is possible that the dialog around libraries and campus internationalization is only evolving, as evidenced in the survey results. Therefore, as with ACE, the intent is to repeat this survey every five years, to collect longitudinal data and systematically track the ways in which academic libraries articulate, support, and intersect with campus internationalization over time. Both the ACE and library-focused survey indicate that internationalization initia- tives continue to increase on college campuses across the United States. The ACE report concludes with recommendations for more research to be conducted on best practices for internationalization and for ensuring that student learning is at the core of internationalization efforts.37 In tandem, the authors recommend development of best practices and assessment measures for library support of campus internationalization, broadening the internationalization context that ACE has established. Overall, the libraries and campus internationalization survey results corresponded well with evidence found in the review of the literature. Libraries see increasing in- ternational activities and respond to needs to support student services and curricular changes that have resulted from campus global education initiatives. Although the survey is not predictive, it is easy to hypothesize that, moving forward, there will be an increasing emphasis on the library’s role in meeting international goals and student demands.38 Notes 1. Though beyond the scope of this paper to address the vast literature on the rationale and context of increased internationalization on U.S. campuses, further sources include: National Association of State Universities and Land Grant Colleges, “A National Action Agenda for In- ternationalizing Higher Education” (2007), available online at www.aplu.org/NetCommunity/ Document.Doc?id=471 [accessed 16 May 2014]; American Council on Education (ACE) Center for International and Global Engagement, “Strength Through Global Leadership and Engagement: U.S. Higher Education in the Twenty-First Century” (2011), available online at www.acenet.edu/ news-room/Documents/2011-CIGE-BRPReport.pdf [accessed 16 May 2014]; National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, and Institute of Medicine, Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Bright Economic Future (Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press, 2007); Mary Witt, Shifting Tides in Global Higher Education: Agency, Autonomy, and Governance in the Global Network (New York: P. Lang, 2011). 2 ACE American Council on Education, “Mapping Internationalization on U.S. Campuses: 2012 Edition” (2012), 4, available online at www.acenet.edu/news-room/Documents/MappingIn- ternationalizationonUSCampuses2012-full.pdf [accessed 29 January 2014]. 3. ACE American Council on Education, “2012 Mapping Internationalization on U.S. Cam- puses” (2012), available online at www.acenet.edu/news-room/Pages/2012-Mapping-Internation- alization-on-U-S-Campuses.aspx [accessed 29 January 2014]. 4. ACE American Council on Education, “Mapping Internationalization on U.S. Campuses: 2012 Edition Survey” (2012), 1, available online at www.acenet.edu/news-room/Documents/ MappingInternationalizationonUSCampuses2012-survey.pdf [accessed 29 January 2014]. 5. Karen Bordonaro, Internationalization and the North American University Library (Lanham, Md.: Scarecrow Press, 2013); Laurie Kutner, “Think Locally, Act Globally: Understanding Home Institution Library Engagement among Study-abroad Students,” College & Research Libraries 70, no. 2 (2009): 158–76. 6. ACE American Council on Education, “Mapping Internationalization on U.S. Campuses: 2012 Edition,” 3. Mapping Academic Library Contributions to Campus Internationalization 607 7. Ibid., 24. 8. Madeleine F. Green and Christa Olson. Internationalizing the Campus: A User’s Guide. (Washington, D.C.: American Council on Education. Center for Institutional and International Initiatives, 2003), vi. 9. NAFSA’s Guide to Education Abroad for Advisors and Administrators, 3rd ed., eds. Joseph L. Brockington, William Hoffa, and Patricia Martin (Washington. D.C.: NAFSA: Association of International Educators, 2005); Kutner, “Think Locally, Act Globally,” 158–76. 10. John K. Hudzik, “Comprehensive Internationalization: From Concept to Action” (2011), available online at www.nafsa.org/uploadedFiles/NAFSA_Home/Resource_Library_Assets/ Publications_Library/2011_Comprehen_Internationalization.pdf [accessed 29 January 2014]. 11. Examples include: Terry C. Rodenberg, “Measuring Commitment to Internationalizing the Campus: An Institutional Footprint,” Journal of Applied Learning in Higher Education 2, (2010): 39–53; Madeleine F. Green, “Measuring and Assessing Internationalization” (2012), available online at www.nafsa.org/uploadedFiles/NAFSA_Home/Resource_Library_Assets/Publications_Library/ Measuring_And_Assessing_Internationalization.pdf [accessed 29 January 2014]. 12. Rodenberg, “Measuring Commitment to Internationalizing the Campus,” 39–53. 13. Linda K.W. Becker, “Globalisation and Internationalisation: Models and Patterns of Change for Australian Academic Librarians,” Australian Academic & Research Libraries 37, no. 4 (2006): 282–98; Linda K.W. Becker, “Internationalisation: Australian Librarians and Expanding Roles in Higher Education,” Australian Academic & Research Libraries 37, no. 3 (2006): 200–20. 14. Bordonaro, Internationalization and the North American University Library. 15. Ibid., 13. 16. Transforming Research Libraries for the Global Knowledge Society, ed. Barbara Dewey (Oxford: Chandos Publishing, 2010). 17. Kaetrena D. Davis, “Global Evolution: A Chronological Annotated Bibliography of In- ternational Students in U.S. Academic Libraries” (2007), available online at www.ala.org/acrl/ sites/ala.org.acrl/files/content/publications/booksanddigitalresources/digital/globalevolution. pdf [accessed 29 January 2014]. 18. Diane E. Peters, International Students and Academic Libraries: A Survey of Issues and Annotated Bibliography. (Lanham, Md.: Scarecrow Press, 2010). 19. International Students and Academic Libraries: Initiatives for Success, eds. Pamela A. Jackson and Patrick Sullivan (Chicago: Association of College and Research Libraries, 2011). 20. Dawn Amsberry, “Deconstructing Plagiarism: International Students and Textual Borrow- ing Practices,” Reference Librarian 51, no. 1 (2009): 31–44; Yu-Hui Chen and Mary K. Van Ullen, “Helping International Students Succeed Academically Through Research Process and Plagia- rism Workshops,” College & Research Libraries 72, no. 3 (2011): 209–35; Heidi Gauder and Fred Jenkins, “Engaging Undergraduates in Discipline-based Research,” Reference Services Review 40, no. 2 (2012): 277–94; Ellen H. Hammond, “Internationalization in Higher Education and Global Access in a Digital Age,” Library Management 30, no. 1/2 (2009): 88–98; Ning Han and Susan L. Hall, “Think Globally! Enhancing the International Student Experience with LibGuides,” Journal of Electronic Resources Librarianship 24, no. 4 (2012): 288–97; Catherine A. Lemmer, “A View from the Flip Side: Using the ‘Inverted Classroom’ to Enhance the Legal Information Literacy of the International LL.M. Student,” Law Library Journal 105, no. 4 (2013): 461–91; Julia A. Martin, Kath- leen M. Reaume, Elaine M. Reeves, and Ryan D. Wright, “Relationship Building with Students and Instructors of ESL: Bridging the Gap for Library Instruction and Services,” Reference Services Review 40, no. 3, (2012): 352–67; Christopher Shaffer, Lisa Vardaman, and Donna Miller, “Library Usage Trends and Needs of International Students,” Behavioral & Social Sciences Librarian 29, no. 2 (2010): 109–17; Claire Walker and Amanda Click, “Meeting the Reference Expectations of ESL Students: The Challenges of Culture,” College & Research Libraries News 72, no. 1 (2011): 20–23. 21. Ann Lindell, Library Support for Study Abroad (SPEC Kit 309) (Washington, D.C.: Association of Research Libraries, 2008). 22. Kayo Denda, “Study Abroad Programs: A Golden Opportunity for Academic Library Engagement,” Journal of Academic Librarianship 39 no. 2 (2013), 155–60; Kutner, “Think Locally, Act Globally,” 158–76. 23. Sarah F. Cohen and Andy Burkhardt, “Even an Ocean Away: Developing Skype-based Reference for Students Studying Abroad,” Reference Services Review 38, no. 2 (2010): 264–73. 24. Harriet Green, “Libraries across Land and Sea: Academic Library Services on International Branch Campuses,” College & Research Libraries 74, no. 1 (2013): 9–23. 25. Nicole E. Brown and Jill Barr-Walker, “Collaboration and Innovation ‘Across Land and Sea’: Developing Global Library Orientations,” College & Research Libraries News 74, no. 9 (2013): 484–87. 26. Jane Smith, “An International Collaboration: Establishing an Education Collection in a Library in Qatar,” Behavioral & Social Sciences Librarian 26, no. 3 (2008): 33–45; Jenny Coombs, 608 College & Research Libraries July 2015 “Delivering Information Literacy Support Internationally: A Report of a Visit to the University of Nottingham’s Overseas Campuses,” Journal of Information Literacy 7, no. 1 (2013): 90–92. 27. Ismail Abdullahi, Leif Kajberg, and Sirje Virkus, “Internationalization of LIS Education in Europe and North America,” New Library World 108, no. 1–2 (2007): 7–24. 28. Lily G. Griner and Patricia J. Herron, “Preparing Global Citizens: Librarians Connect Students with a Learning Service Opportunity in Nicaragua,” Electronic Journal of Academic and Special Librarianship 10, no. 3 (2009), available online at southernlibrarianship.icaap.org/content/ v10n03/griner_l01.html [accessed 30 January 2014]. 29. Tony Kidd and Karen Roughton, “International Staff Exchanges for Academic Libraries,” Journal of Academic Librarianship 20, no. 5–6 (1994): 295–99. 30 Irene Gashurov, “Academic Library Exchange: Shanghai, China and New York City,” International Leads 24, no. 3 (2010): 5, 7–8; David Atkins, Anthony D. Smith, and Barbara Dewey, “From the Great Smokies to the Mountains of the Moon: U.S. and Ugandan Librarians Collabo- rate in a Digital World,” Information Technology & Libraries 24, no. 4 (2005): 192–96; Margaret Law, “Ready, Set, Go… Starting a Library’s International Program,” Feliciter 56, no. 6 (2010): 246–50; David Aznar and Richard Jost, “A Tale of Two Law Libraries,” AALL Spectrum 15, no. 2 (2010): 20–24; Mary Mavroudis and April Yasamee, “Trading Places, Wide Open Spaces,” Art Libraries Journal 33, no. 4 (2008): 17–22. 31. Megan Johnson, Weihua Shi, and Xiaorong Shao, “Exploring Library Service Models at Fudan University and Appalachian State University: Experiences from an International Librarian Exchange Program,” International Information & Library Review 42, no. 3 (2010): 186–94; M. Kathleen Kern, “From Accidental Technologist to Accidental Traveler, or What I Learned from a Month in Shanghai,” Reference & User Services Quarterly 48, no. 2 (2008): 118–21. 32. Building Area Studies Collections, eds. Dan C. Hazen and James H. Spohrer (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz-Verlag, 2007); Eve Gray, “Access to Africa’s Knowledge: Publishing Development Research and Measuring Value,” African Journal of Information and Communication 10 (2009–2010): 4–19; Joe Lenkart, Thomas H. Teper, Mara Thacker, and Steven W. Witt, “Measuring and Sustain- ing the Impact of Less Commonly Taught Language Collections in a Research Library,” College & Research Libraries, 76, no. 4 (2015): 222–233, available online at http://crl.acrl.org/content/76/2/222. abstract [accessed 22 May 2015]. 33. Transforming Research Libraries for the Global Knowledge Society, ed. Dewey, 113; Liz Cooper and JoAnn Jacoby, “Information Needs and Research Practices of Graduate Students in the Master’s in Development Program,” in Open Access and Digital Libraries: Social Science Libraries in Action/ Accesso Abierto y Bibliotecas Digitales: Bibliotecas de Ciencias Sociales en Accion, IFLA Publications 158, eds. Lynne Rudasill and Maria Dorta-Duque Ortiz (Berlin: De Gruyter, 2013), 275–88. 34. National Center for Education Statistics, “IPEDS Data Center” (2013), available online at http://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/datacenter/Default.aspx [accessed 1 February 2014]. 35. ACE, American Council on Education, “Mapping Internationalization on U.S. Campuses: 2012 Edition,” 9. 36. Colleen Boff and Kristin Johnson, “The Library and First-Year Experience Courses: A Nationwide Study,” Reference Services Review 30, no. 4 (2002): 277–87. 37. ACE, American Council on Education, “Mapping Internationalization on U.S. Campuses: 2012 Edition,” 24. 38. The authors wish to acknowledge the Research and Publication Committee of the Univer- sity of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Library, which provided support for the completion of this research.