Introduction In these challenging economic times, the value of academic libraries to the institution’s core goals and mission comes under close scrutiny. Measuring the use and outcomes of library resources helps to demonstrates the value of library collections and helps librarians make decisions about collections and services. The Value, Outcome, and Return on Investment of Academic Libraries project (Lib-Value) is a three- year study funded by the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS). Part of the project seeks to measure the value of the library’s resources by examining scholarly reading patterns and comparing use patterns of the library- provided materials with those of scholarly materials accessed from other sources. The survey and methods are based on long-term research conducted by Carol Tenopir and Donald King, University of Tennessee (see Tenopir et al. 2012). At the 2011 Charleston conference I asked Carol Tenopir if Seton Hall University could participate in this research. Following IRB approval, we moved ahead with our survey. Methods In March 2012, I sent separate messages to about 450 faculty members, 3,300 graduate students, and 5,000 undergraduates. The message included a link to a survey housed on the University of Tennessee’s server. The survey used the “critical incident” technique. Respondents were asked to recall their most recent reading of books and articles (the critical reading incident). All surveys shared a core group of questions, but student surveys were shorter than faculty surveys. The data were analyzed at University of Tennessee. Response rates were: faculty 19%, graduate students 4.4%, undergraduates 2.9%. Results: Figure 1: Average reading per month by SHU faculty and students. Assessment of results: key points Library resources, especially online articles, are heavily used and valued by faculty and students. Most articles are recent, but 30% are > 5 years old Stress publication dates in library instruction, consider purchasing electronic back files. Students may not know that articles come from the library We need to promote and brand our content. Library resources strongly support faculty research and teaching and student coursework and research. The library is not the main destination for books;. Textbooks aside, there may be gaps in our collections. Recent weeding project; investment in e-books to update collections. We need more consultation with faculty and updated collection development policy. Dr. Lisa Rose-Wiles Seton Hall University Libraries Literature Cited Tenopir, C., Volentine, R., & King, D.W. (2012). UK Scholarly Reading and the Value of Library Resources: Summary Results of the Study Conducted Spring Scholarly reading by SHU faculty and students is similar to other participating universities. There is more demand for articles than books. > 70% are 5 years old. Fig 3: Book and article readings support faculty teaching, research and writing Scholarly reading as a measure of Library Value at Seton Hall University > 70% of articles faculty obtained from the library are important or essential to research and teaching. > 90% of readings obtained from the library are from an electronic subscription. Fig. 2: the library is the most common source of scholarly articles Books are more likely to be purchased (faculty 47%, grads 67%, undergrads 55%) 30% of faculty books come from publishers, 13% via ILL Fig 4. Article readings supporting student Assignments and research Books are more often required reading (grads 49%, undergrads 74%) Acknowledgements My thanks to Carol Tenopir & Rachel Volentine and the Lib-Value team (University of Tennessee, Knoxville) for allowing me to participate in this project. The Lib-Value project is funded by the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS). © Lisa Rose-Wiles,