Comments on: The State of America’s Libraries, from ALA, April 2007 http://www.librarian.net/stax/2025/the-state-of-americas-libraries-from-ala-april-2007/ putting the rarin back in librarian since 1999 Tue, 16 Mar 2010 04:08:26 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: Beth http://www.librarian.net/stax/2025/the-state-of-americas-libraries-from-ala-april-2007/comment-page-1/#comment-89488 Beth Sat, 05 May 2007 16:52:08 +0000 http://www.librarian.net/stax/2025/the-state-of-americas-libraries-from-ala-april-2007/#comment-89488 The ALA salary survey is available on-line in a free trial version, helpful for negotations, and job hunting. http://ala-apa.org/salaries/alaapasurveys.html The ALA salary survey is available on-line in a free trial version, helpful for negotations, and job hunting.

http://ala-apa.org/salaries/alaapasurveys.html

]]> By: Laura http://www.librarian.net/stax/2025/the-state-of-americas-libraries-from-ala-april-2007/comment-page-1/#comment-88724 Laura Mon, 23 Apr 2007 15:41:36 +0000 http://www.librarian.net/stax/2025/the-state-of-americas-libraries-from-ala-april-2007/#comment-88724 I've always wondered about that "80% of libraries are rural" statistic, too. I have usually seen it define as "libraries that serve populations of under 50,000." In that case, though, a great many libraries in the Chicago suburbs would qualify as rural. <a href="http://www.ala.org/ala/pressreleases2007/march2007/statealanews.htm" rel="nofollow">This release</a> says "population of under 50,000 and not connected with an urban center," which is a little bit better. It's frustrating, though, because "rural," no matter how you define it, covers such a wide variety of situations. My tiny rural library here in Wyoming, for instance, is actually quite well off because it is connected to both a county and a statewide system. We don't have the same issues as a rural library in Vermont that doesn't have internet access and isn't an OCLC member. I’ve always wondered about that “80% of libraries are rural” statistic, too. I have usually seen it define as “libraries that serve populations of under 50,000.” In that case, though, a great many libraries in the Chicago suburbs would qualify as rural. This release says “population of under 50,000 and not connected with an urban center,” which is a little bit better.

It’s frustrating, though, because “rural,” no matter how you define it, covers such a wide variety of situations. My tiny rural library here in Wyoming, for instance, is actually quite well off because it is connected to both a county and a statewide system. We don’t have the same issues as a rural library in Vermont that doesn’t have internet access and isn’t an OCLC member.

]]>