Planning the Academic Library
For decades, the question “How many seats should be in an academic library?” has been a cornerstone of library planning. The answer, traditionally, has been derived from simple, quantitative benchmarks tied to the institution’s full-time equivalent (FTE) enrollment. A long-standing, though now largely outdated, rule of thumb suggested by Aaron Cohen Associates, ltd. requires seating for 20% of the student FTE. However, the academic landscape of the 21st century doesn’t allow for such simplistic ratios obsolete. The profound shift in student learning behaviors, the ubiquity of digital resources, and the increasingly diverse academic and social needs of a modern student body demand a more sophisticated, nuanced, and quality-focused approach to space planning.
Rethinking the Ecosystem
The contemporary academic library is no longer merely a repository for physical collections; it has evolved into a dynamic ecosystem supporting a wide spectrum of activities—from silent, deep individual study to loud, collaborative group projects; from technology-rich media creation to quiet contemplation; from formal instruction to informal peer tutoring. In this new paradigm, the sheer quantity of seats is a misleading metric of a library’s value and effectiveness. The quality, variety, and condition of those seats are far more indicative of the library’s contribution to student success and engagement.
A Shift in Planning
Recent discussions within the library planning community reflect this shift. An informal survey conducted during the American Library Association (ALA) Buildings for College and University Libraries Committee meeting on December 12, 2025, indicated a consensus that modern libraries should be planned to seat 25% to 33% of the FTE—a significant increase from historical standards. This is evidenced by leading institutions like Duke University, which plans its libraries at a 25% ratio, while other major universities like Texas A&M currently stand at a lower 15%. This variance highlights the lack of a universal, modern standard and the urgent need for a new methodology.
Quality Focused Approach
This blog argues for a fundamental move away from population-based ratios alone. We propose a quality-focused approach that synthesizes historical benchmarks with contemporary trends, incorporating granular space utilization and condition data alongside enrollment figures. By analyzing not just how many students we can seat, but how they actually use the space, we can establish future seating levels that create truly effective, desirable, and supportive learning environments for the modern academic library.
The Obsolescence of Historical Benchmarks
Historically, library planning standards relied heavily on prescriptive formulas. The 1975 ACRL “Standards for College Libraries,” for example, outlined a methodology for determining building size that included seating requirements based on student population. For a typical residential college, it recommended seating for one for each four FTE students (25%). While the percentage appears modern, the underlying assumption was for a uniform type of seating—largely individual carrels and tables for quiet reading of physical collections. The library was seen as a singular “place for books,” and its seating plan reflected that monolithic function.
Today, these historical benchmarks fail because they cannot account for the complex variables that define modern library usage:
- Diversity of Learning Activities: A single ratio cannot capture the need for a diverse portfolio of spaces. Modern students require quiet zones, collaborative tables, bookable group study rooms, tech-enabled media labs, presentation practice rooms, comfortable lounge areas for social learning, and even wellness spaces for relaxation and stress reduction. A library with 3,000 identical study carrels is functionally inferior to one with 2,500 seats distributed across a variety of purpose-built environments.
- The Impact of Digital and Hybrid Learning: It was once assumed that the rise of digital resources and online learning would diminish the need for physical library space. The opposite has proven true. As students engage with course materials on their own devices, they increasingly seek out the library as a “third place”—a neutral, academic-focused territory away from both the home and the classroom. Furthermore, pedagogical models like the “flipped classroom” drive students to the library in groups to watch lectures and collaborate on projects, increasing the demand for flexible, group-oriented spaces.
- Peak Demand vs. Average Use: Simple ratios fail to address the tidal nature of library occupancy, which often soars to unsustainable levels during midterms and final exams. Planning based on an average day’s usage will leave a library catastrophically overcrowded when students need it most, creating a negative user experience and undermining the library’s mission.
- The Quality Imperative: A seat is not just a seat. broken furniture, poor lighting, insufficient power outlets, or a disruptive acoustic environment can render a seat unusable. Planning based on a simple seat count ignores the critical importance of the space’s physical condition and its alignment with user expectations for comfort, accessibility, and technology.
A New Paradigm: From Population to Utilization
The question is no longer simply “how many seats?” but rather “how many seats of the right kind, in the right place, and of the right quality?” The old benchmarks have expired. The modern academic library, as the intellectual and social heart of the campus, requires a strategic planning model that reflects its multifaceted role.
By shifting from a static, population-based ratio to a dynamic, utilization-driven model, we can more accurately forecast future needs. By overlaying this quantitative analysis with crucial qualitative data on space condition and user experience, we can ensure that our investments are directed toward creating spaces that are not only sufficient in number but are also desirable, functional, and actively contribute to student learning and success. The future of the academic library is a future built on evidence, quality, and a deep understanding of the user community it is designed to serve.
