Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
LIBRARY RESOTIRCES & IECTINICAL SBRVICES
VOLUME 40. NUMBER I JANUARY 1996
40(l):r-lM ISSN0024-2527
AMERIC{N LIBRARY ASSOCIAfl ON
ASSOCIATION FOR LTBRARY COT I.ECTIONS & TECHMCAL SERVICES
ARTICLES
Hong Xu
Edie Tibbits
Margaret Mering 4Iand Pamela Simpson
Loanne Snavely and Katie Clark 49
NOTES ON OPERATIONS
Peter Zhou 62
Paul Conway
Janet Gertz 78
Susan Cook Summer 84
FEATURES
Gregory H. Leazer, Editor 93
102
103
101
The Impact of Automation on JobRequirements and Quali{icationsfor Catalosers and ReferenceLibrariansln Academic Libraries
Bindine ConventionsIbr Muiic Materials
The Worst of the Worst: CelebratingTwenty Years of the Worst Serial TitleChange ofthe Year Award
What Users Really Think:How They See and Find Serialsin the Arts and Sciences
Acquisitions of Hard-to-FindBackfiles of Chinese Periodicals{rom the People'.s Republic of China
Selecting Micro{ilm fbr DigitalPreservation: A Case Studyfrom Project Open Book
Selection fbr Preservation :A Digital Solution {br Illustrated Texts
E rgonomics Programs and Activitier-in Research Libraries
Book Reviews
Letter.s
Instructiclns to Authors
Index to Advertisers
JJ
o i
EDMORIALBOARDEditor und Chair of the Editorial Board . . Rrcrnno P. Srr.rrneclreEdi tor ia lAssis tant . . . . . DAVTDH.THoMASAssistant Editors:
Sllly Soprnns . . for Acquisitions Section
Jav Llvnnrcnr . . {br Cataloging and Classi{ication SectionBoNNIE MlcEwan . . lbr Collection Management and Development SectionRrcIna SINcI-{IR lbr Preservation and Relbrmatting Section
fonn |. Rrrvrn . . . {br Serials SectionRoBERT HoI-lry . Soecial EditorC, ' ,ntxMlNotr- . . . . .Specia lE&torG n n c o n v H . L E A Z E R . . . . . . . . . . . B o o k R e v i e w E d i t o rTau lnaWr tN rRAUBFRourN . . . . . I n t e rn
Ex-Officio Members:KATHLEEN ScHwEITZBERcnn, Chair, Council of Regional GroupsKlne N Mut lrn, Executive Director, ALCTSDarn Swe NsrN, Editor, ALCTS Neosletter
Li.brary Resources b Techni.cal Seroi,ces (ISSN 0024-2527), is published quarterly by theAmerican Library Association, 50 E. Huron St , Chicago, IL 606II. It is the ollicial publicationof the Association lbr Library Collections & Technical Selices, a division of the AmericanLibrary Association. Subscription Price: to members of the Association lbr Library Collections &Technical Services, $27.50 per year, included in the membership dues; to nonmembers, $55 peryear in U.S., Canada, and Mexico, and $55 per year in odrer {breign countries. Single copies, $15.Second-class postage paid at Chicago, lL, and at ad&tional mailing o{Iices. POSTMASTER: SendaddresschangestoLibraryResou,rcesd:TechnicalSeroices,50E HuronSt,Chicag<1, IL60611.Bu.siness Manager: Karen Muller, Executive Director, Association lbr Library Collections &Technical Services, a division of the American Library Association. Send manuscripts to theEditorial Office: Richard P. Smiraglia, Edttor, Library Resources G Technical Seroices , PalmerSchool of Library and Inlbrmation Science, Long Island University, C. W. Post Campus, 720Nort l rern Blvd. , Brookvi l le , NY 11548; (5I6) 29g-2I74; Iax (5f6) 299-4I68; Internet :[email protected]. Adaedi,si,ng: Todd Goldman, c/o The Goldman Croup,3418 HandyRd., Suite 201, Tampa, FL 33618. ALA Prothtction Seraices: David Epstein, Eileen Mahoney,Bruce Frausto, Daniel Lewis, Christine Squires, and Donavan Yicha. Mernbers: Address changesand inquiries slrould be sent to Membership Department-Library Resources & Technical Serv-ices,50E HuronSt. ,Chicago,IL606I l .Nonmembersubscr ibers:Subscr ipt ions,orders,changesol address, and inquiries should be sent to Library Resources & Technicnl Services, S & S ComputerServices, Inc , 434 W. Downer, Aurora, IL 60506.
Ubrary Rescnraes G Technical Seroi.ce.s is indexe,Jin Libranl Literature, Library U lnformationScience Abstracts, Current Infux to Jou,m,uls in Ethrcation, Science Citati.on Inclex, and Informt-tion Sci.ence Abstracts. Conlents are listed in CAIL (Current Ameri.can-Li.brary Literature).ltsreviews are included in Book Reoiew Di.gest, Book Ret:ieu lndex, and Reoieu oJ'Rersieus.
Instructions lbr authors appear on p. 103-4 ofthe Ianuary 1996 issue. Copies ol books lbr reviewshould be addressed to book review editor, Gregory H. Leazer, Assistant Prol'essor, UCLA Dept.of Library and In{brmation Science, 226 GSE&IS Building, Mailbox 95150, Los Angeles, CA90095- I520; lnternet gleazer@ucla edu.
O American Library Association 1996
AII materials in this journal subject to copyright by the American Library Association may beplrotocopied {br the noncommercial purpose of scientitic or educational advancement grantedby Sections 107 and 108 of the Copyright Revision Act of 1976. For other reprinting, photo-copying, or translating, address requests to the AI-A Of{ice of Rights and Permissions, 50 E.Huron St., Chicago, IL 606f L
The paper used in tl-ris publication meets the minimum rerluirements of American NationalStandard Ibr Inlbrmation Sciences-Permanence o{ Paper {bi Printed Library Materials, ANSI239 48-1992 *
Publication ir Li.brary Resources b Technical Seroices does not imply ollicial endorsement bythe Association {br Library Collections & Technical Services nor by ALA, and the assumptionol editorial responsibility is not to be construed as endorsement of the opinions expressed bythe editor or individual contributors.
Upgraded CIP RecordsAt the tirne of publication!
Available for Approval
and New Titles Books
from
BLACKWELLNORIH AMERICA
Where Innouation is a Tiadition
[email protected]. COM
* J
sd
iiy* @
:33
€ Windows format for ease of use'B OOC schedules, tables, index, and manual displayed
on a single screen'B mN access supports multiple users'B More ways to search and display DDC
Auailable mid-1996
Write for more information to:OCLC Forest Press, 6565 Frantz Road, Dublin, Ohio 43017-3395
r-80G848-5878 r-614-7644000 fax:l6l+7934914
ffilllllff6SS'Publishcr of thc ltewcyltclmal Classlfi carlonoA dtulston ofOCIC Onlhn CMp6q Abffil Ccnbr, Ilc.
rvindows is a registered mdemuk of Miqosoft Cosomtion in the U.S md a mdemtrk in othtr couries
Move up to anew era in electronic
classi-fication withDewey for Windows,rM
the exclusiveVindows@program for
Deweyo users.
/9
The lmpoct of Aulomotionon Job Requiremenls ondQuolificotions for Cotologersond Reference Librorionsin Acodemic Librqries
Hong Xu
The purpose of thls study is to trace the impact of trutomation on jobrequirements and quaffications of catalogers and reference librariuns inacad.emic libraries by comparing and analyzing job adoertisements from1977 to 1990. Four periods uere identified to reJlect the influence of eachimportant library automation deaelopment on job descriptions Chi-squaretests uere used to see whether there are significant differences bettoeencataloglibrarians and reference librari.ans uith regartlto duties and. quuli-
ficutions in each period; and whether there u.re signiticunt differences inprofessional duties ancl qualifications for catalog librarians and referencelibrarians ooer the period*. With the deoelopment of automation in libraries,the requirements of preoious uork experiences for catalogers and referenceIibrarians haoe becom.e more similar, increasing needs for computer skillscun be found in both groups, and a shortage of catalo gers und greater demand
for reference Librarians hru.te led to nrnre entry-leoel positiorL, being Ttostedin both groups. Thare still remoin clifferences between catalogers and refer-ence libruriuns in mnjor responsibilities and knouledge or skills needed.
to the collections, the rel'erence unit has years, although Miller once noted thatbeen more concerned with the retrieval :'the catalog ind rel'erence departmentsand transfer of infbrmation required by have been called the 'siamese twins' ofthe library user. It is sometimes said that library work" (193f , p. 169).catalogers"liketoworkwithbooks"while Since the 1970s, as more and more
HoNc Xu is a Ph D. candidate at the Graduate School of Library and In{brmation Science,University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign ([email protected]). The critical and veryvaluable comments of Prof'essor Brett Sutton are gratelully acknowledged. Pro{'essor F. W.Lancaster guided and encouraged me throughout this research. Manuscript received April 29,1995; revised August 21, 1995; accepted lbr publication September 11, f995.
'J"0/ LRTS . 40(1) . )(u
technological innovations have been in-troduced- in libraries, more and moremembers of the library st#f have beenrequired to participate in library automa-tion activities. For example, catalogersand re{'erence librarians have been in-volved in designing, organizing, and usingonline catalogs. With the implementationol user-friendly online catalogs and theavailability of infbrmation in CD-ROMfbrmat, the roles of ref'erence librarians
There is a general agreement that bib-liographic utilities and computer data-bases have allowed duties once nerfbrmedhy prof'essional catalogers and- relerencelibrarians (suclr as copy cataloging andready ref'erence) to be eiecuted at a'lowerorganizational level. The new technologyhas also led to an increasins need lbr cata-logers and ref'erence libiarians to haveboth computer skills and administrativeexDenence.
An analysis ofjob descriptions fbr cata-logers and ref'erence librarians over sev-eral years might indicate the pace of Ii-brery automation. Job advertisementsrellect current rrriorities and the desiresof employers afcertain times under cer-tain social conditions. A qryical adveftise-rnent describes the position and enumer-ates the required lluali{ications. Somenotices also include pref'erred or desirablere<luirements. Therefbre, such advertise-ments might be an indicator of changing
*fr *, resporrsibilities in the prof'es-
Ru,spect to Cuhure un,tl Original Nah.tre(1922), rnight he the ma.jor reason. Og-burn stated that normative and social re-lationship changes cannot occur instanta-neously to keep pace with technological
innovation.s; in {'act they might changevery slowly. Because technological changeresults fiom new combinations of existingtechnology, the larger the technicalknowledge-base ofsociety, the greater thepossibility lbr new combinations, or tech-nological innovations. There{bre techno-logical change (material cultural change)tends to grow exponentiaily. Nonmateiialculture adapts to material culture, whichmeans that methods, processes, and or-ganizational structures for using and con-trolling new technology are developed #'-ter the acceptance ol'any new technirlue.In librarianship, budget limitations andthe limited human capacity to absorb andadapt to change (Shreeves 1994) {urtherliustrate the timely evolution of require-ments and duties of prof'essionals.
One rnight {ind, fbr instance, that enduser online searching and the introduc-tion o{ CD-ROM sysiems in academic li-braries during the 1980s not only changeduser exrrectations lbr ref'erence servicesbut also changed the way re{'erence li-brarians pe#brm their jobs. However, re-rluirements concerning the knowledge ofsuch relevant skills did not immediatelyappear in job advertisements. Similarly,the advent ol the Internet in the I990s willcertainly challenge academic library serv-ices and other aspects oI'librarians'roles.However, because "there is a fundamentaldill'erence in the nature of the networkedinformation retrieval tools and the auto-mated systems that have been designedfbr library use" (Summerhill 1994, 143),refbrence services lbr Internet resourceshave not yet been provided by academicIibraries, leading one to expect that jobadvertisements would not yet show thein{luence of the Internet.
This study, then, is an attempt to tracethe impact of automation on the job re-rluirements and qualilications of catalog-ers and re{'erence librarians in academiclibraries by comparing and analyzing jobadvertisements from 1971 to lgg0.
BAcKGRoUND
Many writers have described and pre-dicted the shi{ts in library organizationalstructure, personnel duties, collection de-
LRTS r 40(1) o The lmpact of Automtttion /lI
velopment expenditures, and user expec-tations fbr library services (Nofisinger andBosch 1994) that have been brought aboutby automation. A lively discussion of theimpact of automation on cataloging andre{'erence work in academic libraries hasappeared in library literature since the1970s, and can be desc.ribed undel threesubheadings' (1) impact on catalog librari-ans; (2) irnpact on refbrence librarian.s;and (3) the relationship between catalogand rel'erence librarian.s in a continuouslvchanging environment.
IMPACT oN CATALOG LtuneRreNs
impact on technical services stafl andjobs.There is ageneral perception that "origi-
nal" cataloging departments have shrunk;thu.s automation has brought about achange in both stall'size and composition.
The earliest studies on the impact ofbibliographic utilities date lrom the mid-1970s. Hewitt (1976,274) {bundthat 637oof the 47 charter OCLC member librarieshad reduced cataloging stafl, with a totalof 76.83 net positions dropped. He con-cluded that "the majority of libraries ade-quately stafl'ed prior to use o{'the systemshould {ind it nossible to decrease the sizeof cataloging fdepartm ents]. "
Since their introduction in the 1970s,bibliographic utilities .such a.s OCLC andthe Research Libraries Inlbrmation Net-work (RLIN) have played a major role inprovidingvarious kinds of automated sup-port {br the processing activities requiredby libraries. Spyers-Duran (f979, 35)showed that, in many libraries, 807o togOVo of all cataloging was per{brmed bynonprof'essional sta{T with the aid of auto-mation. An obvious conclusion was thatshared cataloging had reduced the need{br prol'e.ssional cataloging in a given li-brary.
In many re.search libraries, there isnow much less original cataloging activitytakingplace. For example, Mandel (f992)showed that only 20Vo of the total catalog-
ing output of an Association of ResearchLibraries (ARL) member university li-brary in 1989 was original cataloging.
Howeve., Hill (I985) and Callahan andMacleod (1994) both pointed out thatpessimistic writings and negative attitudes-irn the luture c,l c"ataloging and other I'ac-tors conveyed the impre.ssion that catalog-ing was an unattractive occupation andthat this created a ma.ior problem in tind-ing well-quali{ied catalogers. By 1985there was a cataloqer crisis, which led tothe lbrmation of i task {brce within theCataloging and Classi{ication Section(CCS) of the Association {br Library Col-Iections and Technical Serwices (ALCTS).
more di{Iicult than it had been three tcr
need {br database maintenance routineswithin a catalog department. The imple-mentation of online catalogs in libraries
and knowledge of how to organize, re-trieve, and display inlbrmation has grown(Eaton f989, 331). McCombs (1986) pre-dicted that the cataloger of the {uture ismore likelyto be a database manager, withvarying responsibilities within the librarylsbibiiograp6ic control system. In additionto the traditional cataloging knowledge,sta1T training, and supewisory skills cata-
12/ LRTS . 40(1) . )Q"t
Iogers need, they will also need knowl-edge o1' planning, designing, coordinating,and systems analysis and relevant com-puter applications (Hill 1988, 97-98;Bisholf 1989. 41-42).
Ivpecr oN REFERENCE LIBMRTANS
One ol'the most critical trends in librarieshas been the shili {iom the library-cen-tered organization (with public, technical,and administration serwices as the ba-sicstructural divisions) to organizationalstructures bnsed unon client-c.entered di-visions aimed at
-language, subject, or
audience groups (Intnei tggt). thischange implies an increasing demand fbrref'erence librarians because rel'erenceservice has become a maior and essentialpart ofpublic service. Traditionally, cir-culation ancl interlibrary loan also be-longed to publ ic service, but computerand telecomrnunication technologieshave brought those two activities intolhearea of more technically oriented servicesperlbrmed by paraprofbssionals. On theother hand, every time that the libraryincreases accessibility to inlbrmation, newconstituencies are created along with newdemands lbr public service st;lling (At-kinson 1984; Williams 1991).
The first significant move toward auto-mation in re{'erence service can be tracedto the introduction of online searching ofcommercierl databases through venclo.slike DIALOG and BRS. ln academic rel'-erence work, widespread use occurred inthe late I970s and early 1980s. Most aca-demic refbrence ]ibrarians have been ac-cessing bibliographic databases viaOCLC, DIALOG, and BRS {br a rreriodof about twenW years. Other dat'abasesthat were developed later (lbr example, onCD-ROM) ofl'er difl'erent infbrmationand require difl'erent use protocols orhave unique I'eatures that must be under-stood to maximize efI'ective use. More-ovet new database.s eue emerging eachmonth. Hallman (1990) andCrane (1990)liave pointed out that, as a result, ref'er-ence librarians now need a thorough un-derstanding ol' electronic inlirrmati<-rntechnology.
Constant change in technologies alsomeans that demand lbr instruction in theuse of library resources and services willcontinue to grow (Lewis 1994, 448). Theimplementation of user-fiiendly onlinecatalogs in the early 1980s brought aboutan increased need firr user training andsuppt-rrt. The real bleakthrough in enduser searching came in the mid-1980swith the introduction of ontical disc tech-nology into the searching
^environment-
CD-ROM searchins. In 1988 OCLC sur-veyed its participiting members andIbund that seven out ol 'eicht academiclibraries 84Vd ha,J. at least t-rne CD-ROMproduct (Morrison 1990). Reese (1990)pointed out that implementing CD-ROMmeant a change in the fbcus of re{'erenceservice. Many libraries have made end
ljfi:::""--n an integral part of library
With the increasing use ol'optical discand other new technologies, a major rt-rleof the re{'erence librarian is as teacher,consultant, and organizer (Boss Ig87;Reese 1990; Faries 1994). Because an-swering routine ref'erence questions andother traditional work will olten be doneby paraprolessionals, re{erence work willrequire more than traditional directionaland infbrmational assistance. Ref'erencelibrarians not only have to learn the newprinted re{'erence sources, they must alsobecome technological experts in order tostay on top of the constantly changingdevelopments in the {ield (Huang 1990).Crane (1990) pointed out that rel'erencelibrarians should have strong backgroundsin infbrmation resource management aswell as broad general academic creden-tials. Lewis (19-94) stated that subiect ex-pertise and liaison with a wide ringe ol'clients will become the unilying thread ofrel'erence work.
Tur RSLAToNSHIP BETwEEN CATALocAND REFERENCE LIBRARIANS
With the involvement of new technolorliesin rel'erence services as well as in cata.log-ing, the assirnilation ol'relerence and cati-log librarians was highhghted.
LRTS . 40(1) o Thelmpactof Automution /I3
Arret (1979) was among the Iirst toemphasize the importance ol' integratingcataloging and ref'erence services. He sug-sested the need fbr a {lexible and inte-
frated sta{Iing pattern to match the capa-bilities of an automation system. Ifref'erence librarians cannot understandthe tools of catalogers (e.g., Anglo-Ameri.-cun Catcloguing Rules, second editionIAAC P,21, Machine-Readable Cataloging[MARC], or Library of Congress Subje;tHeudings [LCSH]) or if catalogers do notunderstand the "real-world" reouests andproblems of users, then the online catalogcannot serue users e{I'ectively (Walbridge199f ). McCombs (f 986), Cochrane(f983), and Futas (1988) all suggestedthat re{'erence librarians should take oartin online catalog design and improve-ment. Neal (1989) stated that catalog li-brarians involved in relerence servicescan provide efl'ective public service be-cause of their knowledge of bibliographicutilities. Eaton (1989) believes that theimplementation of online catalogs in li-hraries rerluires that catalogers workclosely with systems librarians and publicservice librarians to determine snecifica-tions between the cataloging and- author-ity subsystems and the online catalogbecause cataloging practice has repercus-sions in online catalog displays.
With libraries changing lrom library-centered orpanizations to client-centereddivisions, and with the chanqe in attitudelnrm ownership to acres.s, tlie di.stinctionbetween technical services and publicserwices is blurring (McCombs 198b) anda new kind ol'librarian-the holistic li-brarian-is evolving, with the roles o{'cataloging and ref'erence services merged.
According to Gorman (1983), the term"holistic librarian" re{'ers to librarians whowill carry out the whole range ol prof'e.s-sional duties, includinq selection and col-lection development,
--rel'erence serwice,
original cataloging, and bibliographicservices. The holistic model nrovides theopportunity to increase thC number ol'librarians who work directly with patrons(Clalk and Bingham 1989). Althoughtrulyholistic librarians might not be suitable Iorall kinds of academic libraries. this idea
typi{ies the integration of catalog and reI'-erence librarians.
MEruoporocv
Several studies based on iob advertise-ments have been conducted in recentyears. The major purpose or {bcus ofthese, however, has been an analysi.s of thejob market and predictions of possiblerecruitment trends in the library and in-{brmation lield.
Block (1980) conducted an academiclibrary job market study using a positionsannouncement file maintained by theGraduate School of Libnrry and In{brma-tion Science of the University of Texas atAustin. Block examined the charac-teristics of library positions based uponadvertised requirements, providing somedata relevant to making career decisions,to hiring, and to deiigning curricula.Block {bund that the academic library iobmarket was dominated by rather tritli-tional per.sonnel Iunctions and positionoII'erings (with cataloging and ref'erencecomprising nearly half of the total).
In another academic library iob con-tent analysis, Reser ond Si'liuneman(1992) compared public and technicalservices, with regard to computer skills,{breignJanguage requirements, previouswork experience, educational require-ments, and minimum salary o{I'ered to re-Ilect the situation of the iob market inJ 988. They concluded that iechnical .serv-ices position advertisements requiredmore computer skills and previous workexoerience and were more than twice aslik-ely to require fbreignJanguage skills.Public sewices candidates. on the otherhand, were expected to have more ad-vanced deqrees-. It should be noted, how-ever, that one citn obtain only limited dataIrom this study because very rough cate-gories were used (e.g., computer skillswere divided into "not stated," "pre-ferred," and "required") and because ad-vertisements lbr only one year were ana-Iyzed.
The irnpact of autornation on prof'es-sional catalogers in dill'erent types of li-braries was examined by Furuta (1990),
L4/ LRTS . 40(1) . Xu
who analyzed job advertisements {rom1970 to 1989. Based on pure descriptivestatistics about the number of catalogersposted each year, the percentage oflobsle<luiring aut()mation, nonadministrativejobs with superuisory responsibilities, andnonadministrative jobs with noncatakr-ging duties, Furuta reached the {trlkrwingconclusions: the data neither supportednor reiected the assertion that automationhad reduced the need lbr catalogers; themaioritv r.rl' advertisements mentionedu,rforrratiorr; the {uture ol prof'essionalcatalogers might not lie in an administra-tive role; and the "holistic" librarian mightnot constitute a trend in libraries Becausethe data the author chose to present rep-resented difl'erent types of libraries, andbecause only descriptive statistics wereused, the conclusions might not be accu-rate fbr academic libraries.
The data used in the nresent studvwere drawn fr<>m Am.ericTtn Librariei.This iournal was chosen because it has awide circulation and appears to be thetraditional place to adveftise academic li-brary job openings. Job advertisementsabout cataloqers and rel'erence librariansin academic-iibraries fiom l97l to 1990were the raw material lbr analysis. Thisrange of yeius was selected in order to ac-count {br the impact of bibliographic utili-ties in cataloging departments, as well as theimpact of the CD-ROM end user searchingservice on ref'erence depadrnents.
A random sarnple oT {brty issues (tw<rrandom issues per year) was drawn liom1971 to 1990. Due to seasonal {luctua-tions, certain issues had more job postingsand other issues had fewer. However, thisshould not have a{I'ected the statisticalre.sults of the study because random sam-pling should maximize the infbrmationobtained or minimize the bouncl on theerror of estimation (Schea{I'er et al. 1986,79-80). Only {ull-time positions were re-corded, including temporary positions ifthe contract period was at least ninemonths. The t;pe oflob could sometimesbe discerned by its title (catalog librarian,assistant reference librarian, lbr exam-ple), but when the title was vague a typewas identilied by examining the responsi-bilities or duties listed.
The sample was stratified by dividingit into fbur rreriods in order to trace theinfluence of'each important library auto-mation development on job require-ments: l97l-1975, 1976-1980, l98l-1985, 1986-1990 The periods chosenwere evenly spaced to rellect {luctuationsin the iob meuket and to indicate whencertain changes began to appear. Exten-sive use ol OCLC lrom the mid-1970smisht have been the first indicator to dis-tinguish traditional cataloging activityfiom computer-supported bibliographicactivity; online catalogs {irrm the begin-ning o{'the 1980s might have been an-other important movement to bring aboutchanges in technical and public services;and, then, CD-ROM has had a major im-pact on librarv services since 1985. Theibllowing components (or variables) weregrouped: subject knowledge in other aca-demic disciplines, work experience, com-puter skills, administrative responsibili-ties, and other skills. A{'ter all of the datawere accumulated, they were coded sothat the Statistical Analysis System (SAS)could be used to analyze the coded clataand to provide the descriptive and in{'er-entizrl statistics.
Based on previous .studies on catalog-ers and ref'erence librarians and on thecontents of advertisements, the lbllowingspecilic research questions were {brmu-lated:
1. Are there any significant difl'erencesbetween catalog librarians and ref'er-ence librarians with regard to subjectknowledge, work experience, com-puter skills, administrative responsi-bilities, and other skills in each pe-riod?
2. Are there any signi{icant di{I'erencesin subject knowledge, work experi-ence, computer skills, administrativeresponsibilities, and other skills fbrcataloq or rel'erence librarians overthe pe-riods?Accordingly, two major hypotheses
were to be tested:l. There are signilicant di{I'erences be-
tween catalog librarians and ref'er-ence librarian.s with regard to duties(responsibilities) and rlualitications(or requirements) in each period.
LRTS o 40(1) o The Impoct of Automation /I5
2. There are signi{icant dilI'erences inprol'essional duties (or responsibili-ties) and quali{ications (or require-ments) I'or catalog or re{erence li-brarians over the periods.
Rnsurts AND ANALYsTs
The number of positions fbr catalog andrelerence librarians over the twentv vearsand the number ot'listings that asked tbrdifl'erent rerluirernents and responsibili-ties are shown in tables I and 2. As can beseen, 574 postings were announced inlirrty issues. The overall demand for ref-elence libralians was slightly higher thanthat Ibr catalo{ers (over 547o of the totalpostings were fbr re{'erence). The numberoI' postings lor catalog librarians wa^ssomewhat higher than the number- Ibr ref'-erence librarians in the first period. butajter 1976 the demand lbr- the latterjumped {rom five in 1976 to twenty-{ive in1980. Since 1988 the demand {br re{er-ence librarian.s has been.steady, while thedemand {br cataloqers ha^s continued torise. However, the ibsolute number is stillIower than that f<rr re{'erence librarians.
While the wide implementation ofOCLC and, later, RLIN and other utilitiesmight have caused a temporary surplus ofcatalogers, online catalogs have createdthe need lor cooneration between cata-logers and re{'ereice librarians. Thus thenumber <lf cataloger postings increasedimmediately #ter 1981. The applicationof CD-ROM, on the other hand, mightcreate an increasing demand lbr reler-ence librarians.
According to Bishoff (1989, 40-42),there were dramatic increase.s in the num-ber of libraries during the mid-1970s,which resulted in an increasinq need fbrcatalogers By 1975, hecause r>f economicnnd technical {hctors, libraries requiredf'ewer catalogers. The adoption o1'6iblio-graphic services such as OCLC, WLN,and RLIN, together with the influence ofeconomic {'actor.s, reduced the demand lbrprolessional catalog librarians. This mightnot be consistent with the present lindingsbut, as Furuta (1990) pointed out, the rela-tive lack of advertisements during the 1970smakes it ditlicult to track the real nicture at
that time. The example given by Furutashows that there were 3,467 known place-ments 1'or all kinds o1' libraries, o{'which2,344 were profe.ssional po.sitions. How-ever, the data fiom her study result in only102 nonadministrative postings. It is obvi-ous that there were many more vacantpositions in the 1970s than the datawouldsuggest (Furuta f990, 245).
The Library Statistics {br Colleges andUniversities by the National Center {brEducational Statistics (NCES) from1970-71 to 1987-88 show that the num-ber of librarians increased very slightlyover the years, remaining relatively steadyuntil 1984-85, when there was a larqetlnrp in the total number ot'librarians tbl-lowed by a great upward trend in 1987-88. Cooper (1984, 345) claims that re-placement demand, which i.s the numberof iobs that will be created as a result ol'individuals retiring or leaving their pres-ent positions, is the dominant source o{'new jobs, while expansion demand, whichi.s the number of iobs created as a result ofgrowth in the field, is a small fraction ofthe total. Ifautomation leads to the reduc-tion o{'cataloging positions, a lzrge pro-portion of the postings {br catalogerswould be lbr renlacement rather than ex-pansion p,lrpctses. More expansion posi-tions misht occur in ref'erence and othernublic services. The data collected heredo not show the recruitment type. How-ever, based on the sample data, thereseem to be slightly {'ewer?'ataloging posi-tions advertised than rel'erence positions.There ha^s been an increa*se in both, nl-though the {unctions and responsibilitiesof each job might have changed with thedevelopment of automation in academiclibraries. This trend is reflected moreclearly in {igures I and 2.
SUBJECT KNOWLEDGE IN OTHERACADEMIC DISCIPLINES
Since the Association of College and Re-search Librarie.s' (ACRL) board of direc-tors set it as the basic educational require-ment firr academic librarians,
- the
American Library Association-accreditedMaster of Library Science (M.L.S.) hasgradually become the universal standard
16/ LRTS . 40(D . Xtt,
l l - l l
r + o | |
l - . I I
l l l t l
- t r t l
t t t t l
t t r t l
t t t t l
t t t t l
l s ^ l - l l
l l l o l o c r
i i + l r r -
N i s , o l ; I
l l - l - l l
| | - N | | I
o
cod
Fd
cl
N
r
o
r
N
m
2 E
; b o.O .YH 9
P !'lC A '
z 6
s@
r4
n
6
o
d
@
o
F@
F
rr
@r
DFo
tso
Or
NFo
F
2 4E F
= E
Q Z
i o h d o J N c !
N d o q l @ o i
o i @ I o r o N i
N i r o i n $ c l
i c i l € $ { l | |
i o 6 d s $ s
o | $ N n s I' l
l r r - l o l o
c | € N i N i
r o d i l d 6 i
l r n l s c -
- I o I l ^ -
g i c t F $ i I
i c { $ i o N I
s l o o s
l d F o @
I m c o i c {
l r ( o i m
i d o l i
l s s r 1l d l
l o € o I
d o n i i
i o 6 | |
I r r o r o I
l o o l -
z
Fl
Fr
O
d
IE
F
h
F
z
F
Fi
LRTS e 40(1) o The lrytuct of Autotnntion /17
@
s a
:.i 5
9 ' -= d
z Zb 2
Z E
^ CE t rz z
o o N b s o i i I q ! | o i I i c )I h I i i I C l
g q
6 0 d o . d r @ c t i : . 1 i o c o i i n
H
n ! q i l $ d c . { - 9 l * i o - i O- r e
$ F i N i i i | : |
- - | l g
d € N 6 l o l d | 9 ? c . t @ l r j i l ir r s l d
i € . N c r o | | | S -
v 6 i I I c o
o o n o o I I I q l i h $ d d r oi ' r i
r n o o o | | | ; - - * I l o
l - w o o | | | | I - - | l ;
l r i l o I l l q , l i o i d i dI N
c i c ' ! | | | | | | Y ? o c o d I I @r r r r t @ t l
l * | l l | | I : - - - | l N
l ^ - | | | I | . N i - d | | |d
- - I I I | | | e . ! c . r I I I I I
l t t l r t r r E t t t t t l
l t t t t t t t = t t t t t l
l l l l l l l l = l l l - l l
r t r t t r t t t t t t * t l
r r r t t t l t = t t t t t l- 3 ,
l l l l l l l l S e - j . r i r | || | | | | | | t E d - 6 | I | | |
.EE d
N O ) c { d @ h di N
c N o o l r @ NN i
O l r ) O I r J ( c ) N O
@ 6 i d f i d
1 l 3 $ d a < 0 c . l d
r d c ? l d d d
I o r O s d @ h Ii i l
@ N o l + s *
i n n o l ; I
r n N h d i l c q
6 O N d d \ + A
6 i c i c i i a I
' + | < ' + I c l I
d n I ; o - -
i g c o l r l r
- N o I l r -
i N m d d | |
l r - l - l l
c r l i o o l r I
s , I c a l r a
roo
n
Ioo
N
d
€
roN
o
rod
b-
n
rtr
ro
N
n
b
z
,1t{Oz
N
*l
c q Fn qF T H
F
z
F
A
r -
3 1 55
18/ LRTS . 40(1) . Xu
Y"'
Figure l. NrrmLer ofcatalog and relerence librarians advertised (197f-90)
1971 19n 1975 1976 19n
Ysr
Figure 2. Statistics of academic libraries (197 0n I-87 /88)
requirement lbr librarian positions.There{bre, it is not use{ul to anallze theprolessional education requirements fbrcatalog and ref'erence librarians. How-ever, ;bject background knowledge was
consiclered an imDortant element t<l useto compare the requirements {br catalogand relerence librarians Subject back-ground knowledge was grouped into thelbllowing categories: seconcl masters de-
71
LRTS o 40(1) o The lmPact of Automation /19
that many more relerence services posi-tion.s include a comDonent of book selec-tion or collection dbvelopment in a spe-cific subject area. Statistically signilicantdifl'erences between catalog and ref'er-ence librarians in the {irst
"period (at plevel) and in the other three periods (at plevel) were {bund when considering re-quirement or pre{erence lbr subject back-grc,und (see tables 3A-3D). Over half ofihe re{'erence positions required subiectspecializations, wherea^s very {'ew cata-
requirement o1' subject background lbrboth: 697o in the thiid period ind 54Vo in
the lirur periods (see tables 4A-4B). In-creasing demand lbr ref'erence librarians
TABLE 3A
SUBIECT BecTCnOUUP REQUIRED DURING I97I_75
2nd Master General Stated Not MentioDed Total
VaNo o/o No o/o No o/o N o
Catalog librarians
Relerence librarians
Total
3
8
I 1
z
t)
8
L71
zz
2I
43
I3.6438.r025.58
9 0 9
2 6 D t
18.60
77.27
33 33
55 81
51. 16
48 84
100.00
X2=8 4zt, df=Z,7t={) }Ls
TABLE 38
SuBJECT BacrcnouNp REQUIRED DURING 1976-80
2nd Master
No o/o
Geueral Stated Not Mentioned
No 7o No o/o
Total
T14re
Catalog librarians
ReI'erence librarians
Total
6 13.95
32 50.00
38 35 51
6
L3
I9
13.95
20 31
r / . / o
3t 72.09 43 40.19
19 29.69 64 59 81
50 46.73 107 100.00
xe=tg 893, rlf=z,!t=o oo0
TABLE 3C
SuBIECT BACKGRouND Rrqutnro DURING 1981-85
2nd Master
No o/o
General Stated Not Mentioned
No 7o No o/o No o/o
Catalog librarians I0
Ref'erencelibrarians 34
Total 44
12 99
47.22
29.53
1 a o
22.22
1477
6
16
22
61 79 22 77 5r.68
22 30 56 72 48.32
83 55.70 r49 100.00
x2=35 834, df=z, p=o ooo
20/ LRTS . 40(1) . Xu
TABLE 3D
Suu;rcr BecrcnouNo Rnqurnno DURTNG 19g6-90
2nd Master General Stated Not Mentioned
7o No Vo No o/o No o/o
Catalog librarians
Relerence librarians
Total
I 7 50 8 6 67 103 85.8355 35 48 29 18j7 7r 45 8164 23.27 37 13.45 t74 63 27
r20lDi)
z t J
43 64
D O . J O
100.00
x2=47 .L76, rlf=2, p={) 000
and the shortage of catalogers, whichbrought about more entryJwel positionopenings, might be the major reaion.
WoRr ExpnnrsNce
three years or more; at lea^st {ive years or
TABLE 4ASur;ecr Becrcnouuo REeUTRED FoR cArALoc LrsRAnrA,Ns ovER FouR ponroos
L97t_75
Subject No o/o1986-90 Total1976-80
No o/o
I98t-85
No 7o No
3 1 3 6 4
Generaistated 2 909
N<rt mentioned 17 77 27
Tirtal
2nd master 6 13.95
6 1 3 9 5
31 7209
43 16 41
10 19.99
7 7 7 9
61 79.22
77 29.3922 840
I
8
103
I20
7.50
t ) t ) /
85.83
45.80
28
22
2r2
262
10.69
8.40
80 92
100.00x2=5 ozL, df=6, p=o s4r
TABLE 4Bsunlecr BACKGROUND Regurnro FoR REFERENCE LTBRARTANS ovER FouR penrops
t97I-75 1976-E0 1986-90 TotalI981-85
No o/o
21 6.73
No No o/o No o/o No o/o
2nd master B 38.10General stated 6 2857
Not mentioned 7 33 33
Tirtal
3213I9
64
50.00
20.31
29 69
20.51
34 47.22
t6 2222
22 30.56
72 23 08
55 25.48
29 r87L
71 458r
155 49 68
I29
64
I l 9
3L2
41.35
20 51
38.r4
100.00x2 =8 gI7, tlf =6, 1t =0 L7 S
LRTS o 40(1) . The Impact of Automation /27
TABLE 5A
Wonx ExTBnIENCE REeUIRED FoR Caraloc LrnRantaNs ovsn Foun pERroDS
r97I-75
No 7o
1976-80
No o/o
l98l+5
No o/o
1986-90
No VoWork E
Not state&prerer I
Required 6
I year or more 2
3 years or more 4
5 years or more 3
Total 22
37.21 38
18.60 6
23.26 14
16.28 12
4.65 7
16.41 77
49.35 62
7.79 12
18 18 29
15.58 11
9.09 6
29.39 r20
57.67 r2s 46 9510.00 32 r2.2r24.17 55 20.999.17 34 12.985 00 2r8 6.87
45.80 262 100.00
3r.82
27 27
9.09
I8.18
13 64
8.40
I6
8
IO
7
2
43
x2=17 8or, tlf=tl, p=0 L22
TABLE 58
Wonr ExpnRTENCE REeUIRED FoR RnrsnnNce Lrgne.nre,Ns ovER FouR psntoos
L97r-75 1976-80 r98l_85
Wo* Experience No 7o No 7o No Vo
1986-90 Total
No o/o No ok
Not statecl/preler 10
Rerluired 4
1 year or more 2
3 years or more 3
5 years or more 2
Tkrtal 2l
47.62 3I
1 9 0 5 4
9 5 2 6
14.29 13
9.52 10
673 64
48 44 39
625 4
9.38 13
203r L2
15.63 4
20 51 72
5417 84
D . D D I D
18.06 32l o . o / t o
b b t l d
23.08 r55
54 19 164 5256
9.68 27 8 65
20.65 53 16 99
10.32 44 14 10
5 16 24 7.69
49.68 312 100.00
x2=L9 2s7, df=Lz, p=0 052
32Vo in the first period to 527o in thefburth period; the comparable increaselbr re{'erence positions was 48Vo to 54%o.The percentage ofiobs re(luiring or pre-terring longer work experience (e.g.,"three yeius or more," "live years ormore") has decreased. The f'act that moreentry-level positions were available overthe years shir*s an increasing demantl inboth areas.
In tables 6A, 6C, and 6D we find thatthere are no signi{icant di{I'erences be-
plained that the complex rules involved in
cataloging require that more time bespent training a cataloger than training abeginning re{'erence librarian. It is eco-nomic and efl'ective to seek catalogerswith solid work experience. In the seclondperiod under study, the ref'erence posi-tions were more likely than the catalogingpositions to require {ive years or more ofexperience, and the dill'erences are sig-nificant at the p level (table 68). This isprobably due to the {act that more of there{'erence librarian positions in the secondperiod involved administrative responsi-bilitie.s.
CoMpursn Srrlr,s
As autornation is becoming more perva-sive in Iibraty services, the degree t<rwhich institutions advertise {irr librarians
22/ LRTS . 40(1) . Xu
TABLE 6A
Wonr ExpenrENcE REoUIRED DURING 1971-75
Not Statedor Preter
No 7o
Cat librarians 7 3L82
Re{. librarizrns 10 47.62
Tbtal 17 39 53
Rerluired
No 4o
6 27.27
4 19.05
l0 23.26
I Yearor More
No o/o
2 9 0 9
2 952
4 9.30
3 Yearsor More
No o/o
4 18 .18
3 L429
7 16.28
5 Yearsor More
No. o/o N<r o/o
3 13.63
2 952
5 11 .63
222l43
51 16
4884
Im 00
x2 =L 250, df=4,T=o 870
TABLE 68
WORK EXPERIENCE REQUIRED DURING I976-80
Type
Not Stated orPrelbr
No o/o
I Year 3 YearsRequired or More or Mor e
No 7o No % No o/o
5 Yearsor More Total
No o/o No Va
Cat.librarians
Re{.Iibrarians 31 48.44 4 6.25 6 9.38 13 20.31 l0 15 63 64
Total 47 49.93 12 l1 2I 16 14.95 20 18 69 1"2 11 21 107
16 37.21 8 18,60 I0 23.26 7 16 28 2 4.65 43 40 19
59 8l
100 00
x2=r0 538, df=4, P=O 032
TABLE 6C
WoRK EXeERIENCE REQUIRED DURING 1981-85
Not Statedor Preler Required
No 7o No o/o
I Year 3 Years 5 Yeatsor More or More or More
No. 7o No, o/a No o/o
Cat. librarians 38 49.35 6 7 79
Ref. librarians 39 54.17 4 5.56
Tbtal 77 51 68 10 6.7r
14 18.18 12 15.58 7 9.09 77 51.68
13 18.06 12 16 67 4 5.56 72 48.32
27 t8.12 24 16 11 11 7 38 149 100 00
X2=t 102, tlf= , 1t=tJ S9a
with computer knowledge and skills is animportani concern. Does the rapid expan-sion of computer applications in librariescoincide with the required computerknowledge fbr a particular job?
ln this study, "computer skills" was de-{ined broadly to include knowledge of orexperience with any of a wide variety ofcomputer applications, inclu&ng biblio-graphic utilities, online database search-i"e, CU-nON{, andotherend usersearch-in[ ca-ses. There is no evidence {rom thedata that catalog and ref'erence librariansrequire the same computer skills. Adver-
tisements fbr catalogers always ask lbrknowledge about OCLC, RLIN, or otherblbliographic utilities, while those {br re{'-erence librarians mainly require exPeri-ence in searching DIALOG, BRS, orother online services. A job listing mightinclude more than one computer skill {bra particular position. No cross-tabulationswlre made lbr between-group andwithin-group analyses.
Computer skills {br catalog librarianswere divided into the lbllowing groups:computer applications, automated cata-loging, OCLC, RLIN, and other biblio-
LR?S r 40(1) c The Impact of Automation /23
TABLE 6D
Wonr ExpunrnNce RngurnED DURTNG f986-90
Not Statedor Preler Re<luired
I Year 3 Yearsor More or More
5 Year sor More
No ok
Total
No, 7oTypt No
Cat. Iibrarians
Re{. Iibrarians
Total
62
84
146
D I t , i
54 19
53 09
l0 00
9 6 8
9 8 2
24.r720 65
22.r8
9 .17
I0.32
9 8 2
5 0 0
D . I O
5 0 9
120
155
275
43.67
Dt].Jt)
100,00
T2
I D
27
29JZ
61
I ]
16
27
o
I
I4
Xz=0 562, df=a, p=0 967
graphic utilities (computer online search-ing was included although only one listingin 198'0 and one listinrl in 1986 mentionedit). Computer skills lbr ref'erence librari-ans werddivided into these groups: com-puter applications, online databasesearching in general, DIALOG, BRS,other speci{ic online databa^se searching,CD-ROM searching, OCLC, and RLIN.
Since the 1970s, prdrably the singlemost signilic'ant irnpact in the area ol aca-dernic Iibrary autornation has heen theemerqence of OCLC and other onlinebibliographic utilities. Matthews (1980)reflects that only the OCLC utility existedin 1973, at which time it supported onlyabout 80 terminals. By Apiil 1979, ap-proximately 28Vo <tf the academic librarie.sin the United States and Canada had ac-ce.ss to a utility: OCLC (26Vo), RLIN(O.zEo), UTLAS (17o), orWLN (0.4Va).Bv1985, OCLC had grown to cover 6,584academic libraries (Bourdon 1986). The.speed with which librades have adopteclonline bibliographic services has been im-pressive. From table 1 one can see thatonly one adveftisement fbr catalogersmentioned knowledge ol' computer appli-cations in 1975 Many rnore advertise-ments rerluiring OCLC experience {rlr'gatalog libralians and computer onlinedatabase searchinq skills fbr ret'erence li-brarians have occurred since 1977. Be-cause the impact ol'automation in t'ecruit-intt did not take el lect unti l themid-1970r, the analvsis lbcused on thelater three periods.
'
In {igule 3 we lind that knowledge olOCLC is rnost required or pre{erred lbrcataloging positions. It accounts lbr <tver
half of automation systems or cornputerskills listed in each ofthe last three peri-ods; although, with the innovations andadoption of other bibliographic utilities,the percentage has decreased alter thethird period ({rom about 65Vo to 58Vo).RLIN experience was not asked lbr until1981 (table 1). Adoption o{ other biblio-graphic utilities in the fburth period led tothe increased requirement fbr knowledgeofthese. Experience in "automated cata-loging" was {irst asked lbr in the secondperiod (about ltTo), rose to 187o in thethird period, and since then has declinedas the need lbr specific skills related toblbliographic utililies has gone up.
For re{'erence librar-ians, experience ofc\)mputer databa"-e searc.hing has been tLemost important component ofjob qualilica-tion.s .since 1980 (table 2). A survey of onlinesearching in U.S. colleges and universitiesconduc.ted by McKinney and Mosby (1986)shows that 4l8vo ol academic libraries of'-l'ered in-house searchinq in 1984. In tenyears, the percentage approximately dou-bled. The survev also showed that the lead-ing vendor lbr acaclemic libraries w:ls DIA-t dC (in 87vo <>I the libraries) The otherlea&ng vendors were BRS (507o) and SDC(f57o) DIALOG and BRS were the tw<rservices most widely adopted (see {igure 4)in academic libraries during the third period(rxer 30Vo o{' advertisements asked lbrkmrwledqe ol DIALOG or BRS). "Onlinedatabase searching" experience (serviceunspeci{ied) appliedto 36% ofthe adver-tisements in the second perio d,43Vo inthethird period, and 47%o1n the tburth pe-riod. A huge increase in the availability oft latahases, especial ly on CD-ROM, in aca-
24/ LRTS . 40(1) . Xu
Pd 1 peM2
Figure 3. Computer skills required {br catalog librarians
Ptu1 pedd2
Figure 4. Comprrter skills rerpired {br relerence lilrr arirms
Fc*p'"1l+6rnes I+ohroc I+BRS
l+dEdb il-4Jm I
attention in the period 1986-1990 Since1986, also, refirence duties have ex-panded to include {amiliarilrwith sourcesfbrmerly associated with technical serv-i t 'es. For example, several posit ions lraveasked l irr OCIC and RLI\ exnerience(table z).
I
€
{
6 o
€ 5
c
0
LRTS o 40(1) o The Impact of Automation /25
According to a survey by ARL, over1,500 comrner-ciallv available CD-ROMproducts have been introduced to o{I'erpatr<-rns the opportunity to obtain infbr-mation through inexpensive, user-fhendlylbrmats since the mid-l980.s (Clark 1990).CD-ROM products and databases havebecome an integral rrart ol'research li-brary seruices arirl operations. The avail-ability of CD-ROM databases ha^s createda large demand {br instruction and dem-onstration ofthe searching capabilities ofthis new technology. Knowledge and skillin using CD-ROM has therefbre becomeessential f'or re{'erence librarians. How-
ROM experience (table 2). Probably mo.stC!-ROM training (classes, workshops,and seminars) wis on-the-job trainingprovided by libraries themselves. Clark(rsool h"r'predicted that demands lbrinstruction, publicity, and technical exper-tise relatingto CD-ROM are likelyto con-tinue to grow.
ADMINISTRATIVE RESPONSIBILITIESAND OTHER SKILLS
Job titles that include the term "head,""director," "a.s.sistant or associate head ordirector," or "coordinator," and iob dutiesthat inclutle the term "supervision,""management," or "coordination" wereconsidered as positions that have admin-istrative resnonsibilities.
Chi-squire tests were perfbrmed tosee whether there were anv difl'erencesamong the periods fbr cataloging or re{'er-ence services, and whether catalogerstended to have Inore management respon-sibilities than re{'erence librarians with thedevelopment of library automation.
In both categorie.s, although the abso-lute number o['jobs requiring supervising,administrative, or coordinating re.sponsi-bilities increased from period to period, aspercentages of total jobs, the manage-ment rerluirements have actually de-creased. A lob listing that had both super-visory or administrative and coordinating
duties was cclunted once in the "supervi-sion or administration" group. Statisticallysisnificant dill'erences were not {bund lorei{her type over the lbur periods (tables7A-78). From tables I and 2 one can seethat coordinatins did not become one ofthe job duties throughout the periodsstudied, ranging lrom 0 to 117o.
Chi-square tests show that during thefirst two periods there were no significantdilTerences between catalos and ref'er-ence librarians with regard to administra-tive responsibilities (see tables 84-88);{'rom th6 third period, statistically signifi-cant di{I'erences (at p level) were {bund(see tables 8C-8D). Obviously, catalog li-brarians tend to have more administrativeresponsibilities than rel'erence librarians.During the period 1981 to 1985, cataloglibrarian postings with supervisory or ad-mini.strative (44Vo) and coordinating re-sponsibilities (87o) accounte,J. lor 52.Vo <:l'the total of 77 advertisements; whereasref'erence postings with supervisory or ad-ministrative (I7 Vo) and coordinating (87o)responsibilities only accounted lbrabout25Vo ofthe total of72 advertisements. Inthe fburth period, catalog postings withadministrative responsibilities decreasedslightly t<> 47Vo o{- the total of' 120, andre{'erence postings decreased to 2OVo oIthe total of 155. This might be consistentwith the views that catalogers tend to havemore managerial respon.sibilities than rel'-erence librarians with the development oflibrary automation.
Distinguishing titles with managerialresponsibilities Irom nonadministrativecatilog or re{'erence librarian postings, theconclusion that catalogers tend to havemore administrative resDonsibilities thanref'erence librarians
"*t" ,nor" strongly
supported. Since the {irst period (tables 1and 2) the percentage of the advertise-ments Ibr nonadministrative catalogersrerluiring supewisory or administrativeduties has incteased from about 87o to37 7o . On the other hand. less than 137o ofthe advertisements lbr nonadministrativeref'erence librarians required supervisoryor administrative duties, except in the sec-ond period, where the figtre was 267o.The (burth rreriod decrea^sed to the low-est. about 9%.
26/ LRTS . 40(7) . Xu
TABLE 7A
ADMINrsrRATrvs RpspoNstgrLrrIES Fon Cetrr-oc LruRenIeNs ovER FouR PERIoDS
I98l-85 1986-90 Total
Resnonsibilities No % No % No o/o No % No o/o
r97L-75 1976-80
Super/adminis.
Coordination
Not mentioned
Total
11 50 00 12 27 91
0 000 4 9 .30
II 50 00 27 6279
22 8.40 43 16.41
34 44.16 48 40 00 r05 40.08
6 7.79 B 6 67 18 6.87
s7 48 05 64 53.33 139 53.05
77 29.39 120 45.80 262 100.00
Xz=S 606, clf=6, p=0 469
TABLE 7B
ApltrNrsrnerrvE RESpoNSIBILITTES FoR REFERENCE LIIIMRIANS ovER FouR PERIoDS
Tottl
Responsibil i t ies
1971-75 1976-80
No 7o No o/o
1981-85
No o/o
19ti6-90
No ok
Super./adminis.
Crxrrdination
Not mentioned
Totai
7 33.33 18
r 4.76 7
13 61 90 39
2t 673 64
L2 16.67
6 8.33
54 75.00
72 23 0B
28 13
10 94
60.94
20 5r
24 t5 48 61 19.55
7 4.52 21 6.73
r24 80 00 230 7372
r55 49 68 312 100 00
f,z=ll g]{, alf=6, p=0 063
Communication ablliw. which in-cludes both oral and written skills, is im-portant in management and coordinationactivities. Cornmunication skills were {irstmentioned in the second period (tables Iand 2) {br both categories. Since then, theproportion that listed the skills increasedto one-Iburth for catalog librarians andone-third lor relerence librarians.
Hollsrrc LIBRARTANS
One view on the luture of librarianship isthat librarians will become increasingly"holistic." This can be tested by trackingthe percentage o{ catalog postings thatinclude noncataloging duties such as rel-erence, bibliographlc instruction, collec-tion development, circulation, and interli-brary loan, and by tracking the percentageof ref'erence postings requiring nonref'er-ence duties such as cataloging, collectiondevelopment, circulation, interlibrarykran, and bibliographic instmction. Thedata indicate that there are still f'ew cata-logers involved in noncataloging duties,
althoueh ref'erence duties were includedin a catakrger position as early as Ig79.
There is no evitlence liom the samplethat catalog liblarians wet'e rerluired tohave bibliographic instruction, collectiondevelopment, circulation, and interlibraryloan dlti"s. the malor qualilication fbrcatalog libraria:rs has been special knowl-edge o{ AACR2, LCSH, Library of Con-gress Cln,ssfculion (LCC). Dcweq Dcci-mul Cltssifiuttion (DDC), or theMachine-Readable Cataloging (MARC)lbrmat since 1976 (see table I and ligure5). One might conclude that overwhelm-ing numbers of positions lbr catalog li-brarians asked fbr knowledqe of LCCrather than DDC; with the implementa-tion of online bibliographic systems, thedevekrpment o{ cooperative cataloging,AACRZ as cataloging rules, and theMARC lbrmat as the standard {br codingdata fbr all of bibliographic systems, thereis an increasing need {br knowledge <>fLCSH, AACRL, and the MARC lirrrnat.
Cataloging and other technical serv-ices are still not part of the relerence
LRTS c 40(1) o The lmpact of Automation /27
TABLE 8A
AnurNrsrnruve RespoNsutlLITIES DURING 197 I-7 5
flpe
Super/Adminis Coordinati<n Not Meltioned
N o o / a N o % N o %
Total
No o/o
Catalog librarians ll 50 00 0 0 00 11 50 00 22 51.16
Ref'erence librarians 7 33.33 I 476 13 61 90 21 48.84
Total 18 4I.86 I 2 33 24 55.81 43 100 00
X2 = Z 03,3, (If =2, l, = 0 362
TABLE 88
ADMINISTRATIVE RESPONSIBILITIES DURING 1976-80
Typ"
Super /Adminis Coordination Not Mentioned
N o T o N o % N o o k
Total
No o/o
Catalog librarians 12 21 91 4 I 30 27 40 91
Re{'erence librarians 18 28.13 7 10.94 39 59.09
Total 30 28.04 tI 10.28 66 61 68
43
64
t07
40.19
59 8r100.00
X2=0 082, (tJ=z, p=o 960
TABLE 8C
AorrarNrstnerrvE RESpoNSIBILITIES DURING 198 1-85
Typt
Super/Adminis Coorrlination Not Mentioned
No o/o No % No o/o
Total
No o/a
Crrtalog librarians 34 44.16 6 7.79 37 48.05 77 5I.68
Relerence librarians 12 16.67 6 8 33 54 75 00 72 4832
Total 46 30 87 12 {J.05 9l 61.07 149 I00 00
xz=B 545, {If=z, p=0 0ol
TABLE 8D
AuvrNrsrn,rtlvE RESpoNSIBILITIES DURING I986-90
Type
Super./Adminis Coordination Not Mentioned
No o/o No Vo No Vo
Catalog librarians 48 40.00 8 6.67 64 53 33 I20 43.64
Reference librarians 24 15.48 7 452 124 80.00 f55 56 36
Total 72 26 18 15 5 45 r88 68.36 275 100 00
X2=n 136, tlf=z, 7t=0 000
librariant job duties. Knowledge of classi-fication, subject headings, or the MARClbrmat was not mentioned in any adver-tisement lbr ref'erence librarians. al-though a {'ew li.stings have a.sked lbrOCLC or RLIN experience since 1986
(see table 2). This suggests that {'ewchanges have occurred with regard to in-tegriting the roles of public and technicalservices librarians since Busch'.s suryey in1985. That i^s, the use of technical servicespersonnel lbr online searching of reler-
28/ LRTS . 40(1) . Xu
P d r P d 2
Figure 5. Special knowledge needed by catalog librarians
t
! o
!
$ sE
2
a
ence databases is still relatively rare andpublic serwice staff are even less likely t<rbe involved in cataloging (Busch 1985).
Bibliographic instruction (BI) was nota firmly entrenched element in academiclibraries until 1975, when an ACRL tasklbrce pxrvided guidelines {br biblio-graphic instruction in academic libraries.They recognized that the primary role ofbibliographic instruction is to provide stu-dents with the specific skillf needed to
likely to he spent providing instruction inthe use ol ' 'elecironic . irur".* (CraneI 990). The availability of'end user search-ing (rnainly CD-ROM database search-ing) might mean a lurther change in thetbcus ol leference selice. Encl usersearching will increase greatly the de-rnand and need {br user instruction.
In table 2, we see that bibliographicinstruction re.sponsibility was specified inadvertisements fbr relerence librarians asearly as 1978 Since then, more and rnorehave been expected to have bibliographic
instruction duties. By 1990, over half of'the ref'erence positions specilied biblio-graphic instruction duties (19 of 35 posi-tions), although independent btblio-graphic instruction departments alreadyexisted in some academic libraries andmany advertisements fbr "BI instructor,""BI coordinator," or "BI librarian" wereseen.
Public services librarians, especiallyre{'erence librarians who are in daily con-tact with library users, know the strengthsand weaknesses of the collection best.They are in the best position to evaluatethe'collection in teirns of user needs(Bone 1983). Checking table 2 and ligure6, one might {ind a steadily increasingneed lbr re{'erence librarians to have col-lection development responsibilities. Fig-ure 6 reflects the trend of increasins bib-lit-,graphic instruction and c,ollectiondevelopment duties fbr re{erence librari-ans over the lirur oeriods.
Few relerence librarians are involvedin circulation or interlibrary loan dutiesbecause these services are more o{ienperlbrmed by paraprof'essionals and othersupport stafl. This is primarily becausethese sewices have become more routinewith the development of automation.
0
LRTS . 40(1) o The lmpact of Automation /29
E
. & o
l a
5F 1 5E
Figue 6, BI or collection development duties {br re{erence librarims
CoNcLUSIoN
coming more similar; increasing needs fbrcomputer skills can be {bund in both cate-gories, although the skills requested arerluite difl'eren[ and the shortige of cata-logers and the greater demand {br ref'er-ence librarians have led to more entry-level positions being listed in both areas.However, the di{I'erences in maior re-sponsibilities and knowledge or skillsneeded reveal that the completely holisticlibrarian, as Gorman (t0gg)
'has de-
scribed, might be some time in arriving.The theory o1'Ogburn'.s "cultural lag" isalso well supported by the study.
Although the ef{bct o{'automation onquali{ications and responsibilities o{ cata-loq and ref'erence librarians can be tracedthiough the analysis of job advertise-ments, there are too many uncontrollablevariables to support {'ar-reaching conclu-sions. First, a briefiob description cannotlully embody the complete rec;uirementsand responsibilities oI'a particular librar-
ian. Second, there are dill'erences in re-quirements between postings and the realapplicants. Genaway (1978) demon-strated that a large number of' job applicants in his sample didnot {itthe originallyadvertised requirement. A survey by theCataloging and Classilication Section(CCS) oI'ALCTS also re{lects the gapbetween advertisements and the realworld: in 94 positions advertised withcataloging components, the task fbrce{bund that SLVo reported a disappointingapplicant pool; 37Vo intewiewed morethan {bur candidates, but no institution{bund more than three potentially ap-pointable candidates in a pool. Third,once certain sorts of requirements or re-sponsibilities have become relatively com-monplace, they might not always be men-tioned in job descriptions. For example,whereas some advertisements in the ear-lier period might have required knowl-edge of LCC {br catalogers or skill in usingdi{I'erent hnds o{'printed ref'erence toolsfbr rel'erence libririans, during the laterperiod r-uch skills might have" been ig-nored because lamiliarity with classi{ica-tions or reference tools is now considereda "given" Ibr a quali{ied cataloger or ref'-erence librarian. Moreover, the wording
30/ LRTS . 40(1) . Xu
of advertisements often reflects compro-mises amonq members of the search cbm-mittee. Fina-lly, because the studywas lim-ited to catalogers andref'erence librarians,one cannot find evidence oftechnologicalimpact on the whole organization and pro-fessional structure of academic libraries.For example, with the development ofautomation, other job titles such as "sub.jectlibrarian," "systems librarian," or "access li-brarian" might multiply and rellect an in-creasing trend toward holistic librarians.
With the accelerating development ofthe computer network and its extensiveapplication in academic libraries, impacton job requirements and qualifications fbrcatalogers and re{'erence librarians will bemore t-remendous and instantaneous. Thisis something that needs to be explored byfurther study.
Wonxs Crrso
Arret, Linda 1979 New catalog/new librar-ian? Relerent'e and LC. RQ 19:44-5I.
Atkinson, Hugh C. 1984 The impact of newtechnologr on library organization ln TheBouker annual of libranl and book tradni.nformation,20th ed., ed. J. EhresmannNew York: R.R. Bowker, 109-14.
Bishofl, Liz. 1989. Recruiting, what next? InRecru.iting, echnati.ng, and training cata-logingli,brarians, ed. S. S. Intner and J. SHill. New York: Greenwood, 39-5I.
Block, David 1980 Emerging personnel re-quirements in academic libraries as re-flected in recent Dosition announcemen$.Enrc (ED 2r5 703).
Bone, Larry E. 1983. Noblesse oblige: Collec-tion development as a public service re-sponsibility. The reference librariun, no 9:65-73.
Boss. Richard W. 1987 The {uture of technol-ogr in libraries Paper presented, 9 Feb.,at the Schoo} of Library and In{brmationScience, In&ana University, Bloomington,Indiana
Bourdon, Cathleen 1986 Academic libraries.In ALA yearbook oflibrary and informa-tion seraices l1: 29-36.
Busch, B. J. 1985 Automation and the integra-tion of public and technical service func-tions. li?SD neusletter 10. no. 3: 25-26.
Callahan, Daren, and fudy Macleod 1994.Recruiting and retention revisited: A studyoI entry level catalogers. Techni.cal seraicesquarterly II, no. 4: 27 43.
Cataloging and Classification Section, Asso-ciation {br Library Collections andTechni-cal Services 1986. CCS task lbrce on edu-cation and recruitment {br catalogingreport (June). RTSD neusletter II, rto 7:7r-78.
Clark, Barton M., and Karen H Bingham1989. Holistic librarianship: As it works. InBuilding on lhe first centinl, proceedingsof the fifth national conference of the Asso-ciation of College and Research Libruries,Ci.ncinnati, Ohi.o, Apri'\5-a, 1989, ed. J. C.Fennell and others. Chicago: ACRL, 51-D4
Clark, Katie. 1990 Management of CD-ROMdatabases. SPEC Kits No 169. Nov./Dec-
Cochrane, Pauline A. 1983. The changingroles and relationships of sta{'f in technicalservices and re{erenie/readers' services inthe era ol online public access catalogs.The referencelibrarian, no 9: 45-54
Cooper, Michael D f984 Projections of thedemand fbr librarians in the United States.Library quartedy 54: 33I-67.
Crane, Nancy B. 1990. Academic ref'erenceservice in transition. In Library technology1970-1990: ShaTting the li.branl of the firture : Research contribrfiions fr orn the 7990Compu.ters in Libraries Conierence, ed, N.M. Nelson. Westport, Conn.: Meckler, 15-34.
Eaton, Nancy L. 1989 The electronic environ-ment of tlre 1990s. In Recnriting, educat-ing, and trai.ning cataloging librari.ans,eds. S S. Intner andJ. S Hill. NewYork:Greenwood, 329-39.
Faries, Cindy. 1994. Relerence librarians inthe information age: Learning from thepast to control the {uture. The referencel ibrar ian no.43:9-28.
Furuta, Kenneth. 1990. The impact of auto-mation on pro{'essional catalogers. Inlor-mation technokt gy and li.braries I : 242-52
Futas, Elizabeth. 1988. Current issues in re{'-erence and adult services. RQ 28: I4I-45
Genaway, David C. 1978. Bar coding and thelibrarian supermarket: An analysis of ad-vertised library vacancies. Library journalI03: 323-24.
Gorman, Michael 1983. Online access andorganization and administration of librar-iei. In Online catalogs, online reforenceconerging trends: Proceed,ings of a Li.-branl and Informati.on Technology Asso-ci.ation Ttreconference i.nsti.tute, J une 23-24, 1983, Los Angeles. Chicago: AACR,153-64.
Hallman, Clark. N 1990 Technology: TriggerIbr change in reference librarianship The
LRTS o 40(1) o The lmpact of Automation /3I
journal of academic librarianship 76: 204-
Hewitt, Joe A. 1976. The impact of OCLC.Atwricqn librories 7: 2tt8-75
Hill, Janet S 1985. Wanted: Good cataloger.s.Am.eri.can libraries 16: 728-30.
Hill, Janet S. 1988. Stalfing technical .servicesin 1995. lournal oflibranl administration9 , no . 1 :87 -103 .
Hoerman, Heidi L. 1990. Short supply ofcata-Iogers. The ALA year book of li.bran1 andi.nformntion seroi,ces: A reoieu of libruryeaents. Yol. 15. Chicago: ALA, 90-91.
Huang, Samuel T 1990. The impact of newIibrary technology on reference services.lllinois libraries 72: 600-603.
Intner, Sheila S 199I. Education Ibr the dualrole responsibiliues of an access senltceslibrarian The reference librorian no.33:r07-26
Lewis, David W. 1994. Making academic rel'-erence services work College C-r researchIibruries 55: 445-56.
Mandel, Carol A. 1992. Cooperative catalog-ing: Models, issues, prospects. In Ad-oances inlibrarianshiyt. Ed I. P. Godden.Vol 16. San Diego: Academic,33-82.
Matthews, Joseph R. 1980. Understan&ng theutilities: An introduction to the birth anddevelopment of the major online bibliog-raphic utilities. American libraries lI: 262,264.
McCombs, GiIIian. 1986. Public and technicalservices: Disappearing barriers. Wilson li-brunt buLletin 6I. no. 3: 25-28.
McKinney, Gayle, and Anne P Mosby. 1986.Online in academia: A survey of onlinesearching in U.S. colleges and universities.Online reoieto I0: L07-24.
Miller, Zana K. 1931. The catalog as a reler-ence tool. lll inois librarier 13i165-70.
Morrison, Margaret 1990. The promise ofnew technology. ln The Bouker anm.ral:Library ancl book trade almanac, 34th ed.(1989-1990), 79.
Neal, James G. 1989. The evolving pub-Iicy'technical services relationship: Newopportunities {br .sta{ling the cataloging
Iunction. ln Recntiting, eclucating, antltraining cataloging librarians, ed. S. SIntner and I S. Hill. New York: Green-wood, lIl-ig.
Nolsinger, Mary M , and Allan W. Boscb.1994. Roles of the head of re{erence: Fromthe 1990s to the 21st century. The refer-ence librurian no 43: 87-115.
Ogburn, Wlliam F. 1922. Sociul change roithrespect to culture antl original nature . NewYork: B W. Huebsch, Inc
Reese, Jean. 1900 CD-ROM technology inlibraries: Implications and considerations(using Vanderbilt University as an exam-ple). The electronic librar! 8, no. 1: 26-35
Reser, David W., and Anita P. Schuneman.1992 The academic librarv iob market: Acontent analysis comparing public andteclrnical services. College C: research li-brari.es 53: 49-59.
Sanders, Thomas R. 1986. The cataloger cri-sis: Another iew. American libraries I'7:310
Sclreafler. Richard L.. and others L986 Ele-nlent(rru suroeg sampling. 3d ed. Boston:Duxbury Press.
Shreeves, Edward. 1994. Embracinq the in-evitable. I ournul of ucudemic libririanshiTt20, no 3: f36-37.
Spyers-Duran, Peter. 1979. The eIl'ects o{'automation on organizational change,sta{Iing, and human relations in catalogdepartments. ln Requiem for the canlcatalog: Management issues in automaterlcataloging, ed Daniel Dore and others.Westport, Conn.: Greenwood, 29-39.
Summerhill, Craig A 1994. Tlie emerging na-tional inlbrmation inliastructure and re{-erence services. The reference librarian,no 43:73I-44.
Walbridge, Sharon L. I991. New partnershipswithin the library. Joumal of librury ad-rninistration 15. nos 1/2: 61-72.
Williams, Delmus E. 1991. Managing techni-cal selices in the 1990s: The ruminationsof a library &re ctor. Joum,al of library ad-ministration 15. nos l/2: 25-4I.
PU B LIC LI B IT/ARY ASsOCIATIONs
'IXTHCONFEREME
ACCESS FOR Ail.: The Public libmry Ptomise
More Than 100 Programs / 200 Plus ExhibitorsPreconferences / Author Luncheons / And More!
PLA members receive substantial orice breaks andadvance registration and housing information. Join todayl
For information call 1-800-545-2433, ext. 5PLA.
/ d o
Binding Convenlionsfor Music Moleriols
Edie Tibbits
rI-zibraries today are laced with declin-ing budgets, increased service demands,
preservation needs of an institution'.smany and varied collections. Preservation
I99I,,222). Binding materials and prac-tice.s have a clear iripact on the .shelf li{'eof library materials. Various materials inmo.st collections are bound in diflbrentstyles based on their age, value, and in-tended use (Johnson 197S, 7). In librarybudgets, binding has traditionally beengiven low p.io.ity in relation to other
budget item.s (Bloomberg 1985, 28). A.sreplacement costs of materials continue toincrease, priorities ibr binding and pres-ervation are being reevaluated in the cost-cutting environment of todans institu-tions.
Because of their rrrintecl {bnnats anduse, music materials require special atten-tion when considering binding option.s.Music binding must accommodate thespecial needs of both the practic.ing mu.si-cian and the music scholar. The {inishedvolume should be flexible, able to standopen on a stand or music rack, and lay flaton any surfhce (Roberts 1976, 752). Itmust also be able to withstand repeatedopenings and closing.s. As the cost oI-papercontinues to escalate, the margins of allprinted materials are becoming-mo.. n"r-row (Roberts 1976,76f). This is an espe-cially crucial point tbr music materi-als,where the margins are already quite small.Innovations by music publi.sher.s, .suc.h aspla^stic or wire spiral bindings, exacerbatethe problems of narrow margins. Most
Eotr Ttnstrs is Music and Rare Books Cataloger at the foyner Library, East Carolina University([email protected]). Ma'uscript recJived Julr7, 1995; revised August 19, 19951 ac-cepted lbr publ icat ion September 12, 1995.
34/ LRTS . 40(1) . Tibbits
music is published in limited edition.s andgoes out-ol'-print very quickly. Cottlieb(1994, 30) points out that, while reprinteditions are common, it can be diflicult todetermine which particular edition is be-ing reprinted Becluse musicians are fie-quently concemed with the particular edi-tion ol'a score to be used lbr study orperfbrmance, the identi{ication of reprintsis vital lbr some music librarv natroni.
BACKGRoUND
The binding of music scores with partspresents other problems as well. As musiclibrarians know scores are liequentlyverythin. A score is ollen accompanied bvparts that are to be kept with tlie score a.sa unit. Parts might be printed so that theyhave two open pages on a single leaf,which is to be turnecl completely over fbrthe next tw() pages. This does not allowbinding to he attichecl. Scores issued withparts ire dillicult to preserve as sets.Older scores and some fbreifn scores areprinted on very poor quality paper. Scoresolten are made in odd sizes (fiequentlyover thirty-six centimeters or, convtrsely,less than twenty centimeters trigh). ni-nally, scores lrequently receive very heavyuse by rnusic library patrons.
Music, because 'it
requires specialtreatment, has become a maior exceptionto ordinary binding techniques. As an ex-ception, mu.sic binding genlrally is moreexpensive than ordinary book binding(Miller 1966, 60). However it should bJnoted that binding extends the shell'lil'e ofa score by a f'actor of fbur or {ive (Falconer1973, 335). Binding is a major expense inthe,.op-eration ol'a music library, but it isdillicult to assess the impact oI'bindingcosts on music library budgets becausE{'ew academic librarieshave a-music bind-ing budget.that_is maintained separatelyliom that o1'the library as a whole. (tn thbsample tbr this paper, only one librarvcoulil provide a bindng budget ligure thJtwas exclusively {br mu.sic miteriils.)
SteNpenos
To date, there have been no of{icial stand-ards adopted by the American Library As-
.sociation (AI-a), the Mu.sic Library Asso-ciation, rrr the Library Binding Institutelbr the binding of music materials. Theeighth edition
'ot th" Llbrury Binding In-
stitute StuntLtrcl for Library Bindingmakes no special provisions {br printedmusic, but has several sections that arerelevant. Sections 6.2 (Sewing throughtheJbld), 6.2.2.1 (Sewing throufh the to-idby hand), 10 (Thread),-and tg (Sewinstpes) all relate to music binding. Evenwhen there are accepted standards, li-brary binding decisions will still need tobe based on the type oflibrary collectionand the objectives of the institution(Honea f989, 144).
FonverrrNc PRoBLEMS
There has been an increasing reliance bymusic publishers on plastic or wire spiralbinding in recent years. These scores areusually printgd with very small marginsthat make adhesive bindins diflicult be-cause musical symbols can-not be sacri-Iiced to the binding. Although some pro-I'essional binderies will sew them or useadhesive binding, the results might notstand up to heavy use. Spiral binders pre-sent a major challenge in the music li-orary
Classic procedures fbr the pam-bind-ing of music materials are detailed in Fal-coner'.s article "A Handiguide to Do-It-Yoursell Music Binding" (Falconer I973).She indicates that leives must be sewnthrough- the lbld. All staples should beremoved because they r-usl rapidly, breakaway, and result in detacheiani weak-ened pages contaminated with rust(Honea 1989, 148). Staples might also lailto grip all ol a signature and ale difticultto drive straight through the center fbld.Oll'-center staples can result in tears thefirst time a score is opened (Miller 1966,59). Loose leaves mirst be tipped in <lrstubbed with paper antl sewnln with theother pages. Enclosures need to be pro-vided Ibr thin scores and parts. Care mustbe taken to bind neith-er perlbrmanceparts in with the score tror p"ir displayingtwo consecutive pages on one side ol afblded sheet ol pap&. Solid cover bintlersrequire additional labeling with composer
and title. All parts must be labeled. Bind-ers should also be marked fbr contents(i.e., I score + 4 parts). There should be anotation on the
^binder as to how many
parts are included (i.e., Includes x no.parts) to allow the stalf at the circulationdesk to verify that the complete set is sentout and returned. Music binding requiresextra time and training fbr the library sta{fd<>ing the work When deciding whichscores are to be sent out firr orofessionalbinding, basing part o{ the deiision on thethickness and weight of the score is cer-tainly appropriate. Each score must beconsidered individually and attentivelybelbre any decision about binding can b!matle.
SHELVING PRoBLEMS
Shelving music scores presents additionalheadaclies lbr the librarian. The nhvsicalsize ofthe piece alone can be probiematic.Contemporary rnusic is ollen printed onvery large iheets that are sometimes pub-lished as a set of single-sided leaves. Be-cause so many scores are published in a{irrmat larger than thirty<lne centimeters(the traditional breaking point lbr mostoversize book cullections), it make.s sen.seto allow a larger ligure {br the height orbreadth ol a si'ore to determine the"snac-ing ol' general shelving in the musi'c li-brarw.
Ideally, special shelving can be pur-chased {br these oversize materials,.butthere are occasions when oversize scoresrnust be shelved with the rest of the col-lection. Often, scores with plastic spiralbindings are large and sometimes includeseparate unbrrund parts, pre)^enting enor-mous problems lbi shelving in the"musiclibrarv. They cannot .stand on the shelfwithout reinforcement. If they are held inplace only by smaller neighboring vol-umes, they might warp or curl (Honea1989, 147-48).
Di{liculties are also presented by thesize of miniature scores. (A miniaturescore is one created {br study purposesand in which the notation is too sm-all tobe used Ibr perfbrmance.) Miniaturescores come in many sizes. Some measureeighteen centimeters, while others are
LRTS o 0(1) o BindingConoenti,ons /35
thity-six centimeters in height. Shelvingthe small scores with taller materialsmeans that some miniatures will inevita-bly end up inside the binding of largerscores or pushed to the very back of the.shelf where they might f'all between theshelves. A decision to shelve miniaturescores with larger scores or to shelve themseparately rnust be carefully considered.
Music libraries have particular shelv-ing problems beyond the height and bulkelements discussed above. The bindinsboards on music materials miqht bJthicker than the score within the blndlng.Thus, it is necessary to allow extra linearf'eet lbr these materials in shelving plans.Because so many scures are very thin,there are l'ew snine labels to be read {romthe fiont of the shelf . Thick or pro{'ession-ally bound scores can easily hide thin pam-bound ones. It is possible to put only thecall number on each separate piece, andwith clear-covered binders that might besullicient. But if'solid cover binders areused, most patrons would agree that somesort o1'additional labeling is needed. Veryolten, the most helrr{ul label in{brmationis the composer and title or the title alone.Depending on the placement of this infbr-mation, the library patron must pull eachvolume o{f the shelf Ibr identification un-til the correct score is located. The additional pulling and pushing of scores on theshelves aggravates the problem of mini-ature scores lalhng behind the shelves andincreases the risk oftorn pages.
No matter what labeling is applied,rnaintenance of a range of scores can betedious at best. Anyone working with acurriculum or children'.s collection willeasilv identifv with the situation. Hun-dred-s of verythin pieces of varying sizesfit in a .short section of a range. Shelfreatling can be a nightmare!
CrnculartoN PRoBLEMS
The circulation of rnusic scores presentsadditional complications. If the scorecomes with per{brmance parts, are theseparts going to be circulated separately orwith the score? Will each separate piecebe barcoded? How will the completescore and all ofits parts be kept togetherP
36/ LR?s . 4o(1) . Tibbits
Ifthe parts are kept in the binding ofthescore, how is the circulation record goingto be maintained? Will the parts becounted by stall each time they are re-turned by the hbrary patron? Will the li-brary staff understand the importance ofthat additional task in the circulation ofmusic materials? If the parts are circu-lated separately, how wiil they be pro-tected? Many contemporary pieces areprinted on single leaves o1'paper with onepage per IeaI. How are the leaves ol'eachpart to be kept together and yet separatefrom the other parts? How is the integrityof the score and parts going to be main-tained?
Ltrnnl.runr Rrnnw
A review of the literature on music bind-
policies. The complexities ol'preservationcannot be addres.-sed within the limits ofthis paper. Knouingthe Score: PresensingCollections of Music (Roosa 1994) is.justone source of inlbrmation concerningpreservation issues {br paper music mate-rials.
Mntnonor-ocv
A survey wa^s made of a carelully selectedsample o1' academic libraries lbr whichin-hbuse pam-binding of scores is tlone.
Questionnaires were sent out by e-mail topeople involved with music binding deci-sions and the circulation of music scoresat twenty libraries. The libraries chosen{br comparison are all accredited by theNational Association of Schools o{ Musicand are similar in three variables: thenumber of music majors registered at theschool, the size ofthe teaching laculty, andthe number of music scores in the librarycollection. Based on these variables thefollowins schools were contacted fbr com-parison purposes: Brigham Young Univer-sity, City University of New York at
Queens, East Carolina University, Ithaca
College, James Madison University, KentState University, Michigan State Univer-sity, Shenandoah College & ConservatorySouthern Methodist University, StateUniversity of New York-Potsdam, TempleUniversity, the University of Akron, theUniversity of Houston, the University ofKansas, the University of North Carolinaat Greensboro, the University of North-ern Colorado, the University of Utah, theUniversity of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, WestVirginia University, and WestminsterCh5ir Cr-,lleee. These schools all have250-400 dec-lared music majors, at leastlbrty music laculty members, and collec-tions containing 10,000-26,000 scores.Libraries not responding to the e-mailsurvey were contacted by telephone.Southern Methodist University wasdrorrned lrom the sample because theirscoie collection is larcJr than relbrencesources had indicated. No contact couldbe established with the City University ofNew York at Queens; thus that librarywasalso dropped from the sample.
The surley was conducted over a pe-riod of five months between May and Sep-tember 1994. The survey of twenty librar-ies achieved a 907o response rate. Bindingpractices among these libraries varyividelv as will beilescribed below.
Rnsulrs
Seven of the libraries consulted fbr thispaper have bound 50%-757o oI' theiricore collection in-house. Five librarie"-bind LOVo-4\vo oI their scores them-selves. For only two library collections areall scores currently being sent out lbr pro-{'essional binding. Conversely, one librarybinds g07o in-house. For another, a per-centage {igure could not be determined.
One institution reported that over
$f I,000 was spent in one year fbr thebinding of music. This figure does notinclude other binding sent by the libraryto a prol'essional binder. Of all the librariesconiidered {br this paper, this was the onlyone with a binding budget lbr music ma-terials that is seDarate {rom the total Ii-brary binding bu-dget. If rnore Iibrary ad-ministrators were aware of the actual costsof binding music, it is s#'e to assume that
LRTS o 40(1) o BindingCorusentions /37
pam-binders and supplies might achieve ahigher priority in the supply budgets ofmany institution.s.
Decisions as to the appropriate bind-ing to be used {br scores almost alwaysinvolve the music librarian, an assistant in
Two of' the libraries involved in thisstudy have in-house binding done bypres-eruation departments or someone snecili-cally identilied outside the music l^ibraryto do the work. ln these two instancei.binding decisions are made by these.spe-cialists in consultation with the musiC li-brarian or cataloger. There was only oneinstance reported where the decision ismade without the participation of the mu-sic librarian. In this library, binding deci-sions are made by the head of the acquisi-tions deoartment.
Deci-^sions as to the type of binding touse fbr scores (pam-binder, portfblio, 6ox,or prol'essional binding) involve manyvariables. In this survev, the size ol th!.score wa.s the mo.st common element cited{br this decision. The number of signa-tures contained in the cover is used bitwolihraries in the sample, and the cost <if theoriginal score is used in another. Thethickness (or bulk) of the volume wascited as a {'actor in the decision orocess bvsir librarie.s. The rluality uf t'h" pup"iwhich has some impact-on the wiy'thematerial sits on a music stand, is taken intoconsideration by two libraries. Somescores fiom east European antl Asian pub-lishers are printed on very thin paper withlittle or nr-r bulk. This helps cui the costsof .shipping these .scores oi,.rsear, but canresult in large pages not sittingwell on themusic stand lbr perfbrmance.
The use to which the score will be putwas mentioned as an irnportant lhctoi in
the decision by two of the libraries con-sulted. Is it going to Iay on a llat sur{bce asa .study score would, or is it going to beplaced on the music rack of a piano ororgan or on a music stand?
Pam-binding can be a very labor-inten-sive task. Half of the institutions use stu-dent workers to actually perlbrm the bind-ing work. In one ol' ih"r" libraries, the
in earlier binding specifications issued bythe Library Binding Institute, and re{'er.sto hard, librarv-boind materials. In an-other library the binding unit is part oftheacquisitioni departm enland is supervisedby ihe head of''acquisitions.
The rnethod of attachment of the.scrreto th-e binding has very strong implications{br the li{b of'a musical score. One librarytapes or pastes scores to the binder. An-other glues the signature if it is too thickto be sewn. Two libraries use the adhesivestrips in the center of the pam-bindersthey purchase to hold the score in place.One of these institutions sometimes rein-fbrces this adhesive with staples. Staplesare used by two libraries in the work ofbinding. One ol these libraries mentionedthat .score.s bound in earlier times hadbeen sewn.
The remaining eight librarie"- doing in-house binding hand iew the signature"s t<rthe binder. (Only one respondent indi-cated specilicirlly that staples are removedbeloreihe rcnr" is hand fown.) Generally,there i.s little reinfi-rrcement of the pageunder the sewing or stapling. One libraryreinlbrces with cloth and another rou-tinely uses tape to reinlbrce the innermostsignature. One library with two specialcollections within its music librarv rein-Ibrces signatures under the sewingtfonlythe.score.s added to those collections. An-other provides rein{brcement only if thescore is very fragile.
There seem to be conllictinq ideasabout the Dlacernent ol ' the score within a
38/ LRTS . 40(1) . Tibbits
binder. One idea is to place the score flushwith the bottom of the binder in order tokeep the weight of the score {rom pullingit awayliom the binding. The otheischoolof thought is to allow a bottom margin inthe binding that would keep the [ianorack or items on the music standliomtearing the pages each time they areturned. One-rluarter of the librarie.s sur-veyed make the bottom of the score {lushwith the bottom of the binder. Sixry-threepercent raise the score in the bmder, butthe distance varies. Some libraries raise itonly one-eighth of an inch, others one-quarter of an inch. Some prel'er to raise itone-half an inch or more. Two of the li-brzries in this survey let the size of thebinder dictate the placement oI'the scoreby simply centerirrt it within the binder.One prel'ers to always center the score inthe binding, while another keeps a varietyof pam-binder sizes on hand'and nevercuts the boards to lit the size oI a score.
Respondents agreed that parts shouldbe kep^t on the sh"elf'with thl score as a
Varying methods ol'linkingthe parts tothe score are employed bythe hbraries inthis survey. Mosi indicated that the callnumber oi'the score is written in oencil oneach part. At one institution, th; OCLCbibliographic record number is written oneach part as well. One library barcodeseach separate part and keeps them all in apocket with the score. Each part must bechecked out individually.
Most libraries have devised some
planning to have a {'eature in their onlinesystem that will allow a note to appear on
the circulation item record remindingstal]'to check lirr a specilied number ot'parts. One library includes the instrumen-tation ofthe parts as part ofthe book label.
The need fbr special labeling on thebinding of scores has been eliminated insome libraries by the use of pam-binderswith clear covers. However, some preser-vation librarians are not yet convincedthat the plastic of thes"
"ou"rr; will not do
damage to the score alter long use. Whensolid board covers are used to bind scores,labeling becomes extremely important.Only one library in this suwey dbes notprovide composer and title inlbrmation insome fbrm on the front of a solid coverbinder.
At least two librarians contacted ex-pressed concern about the patron havingto pull the entire score ofI'the shell to reada label. Both of their institutions onrvidelabeling along the spine or lengthwise onthe binder, very close to the spine. Insome institutions, extra labeling is done bythe sta{I' of the music library while theactual binding is done in a location centrallbr the whole library. One music libraryphoto-reduces the cover of the publishedwork and glues this copy to the cover ofthe binder. Another library makes an el-fbrt to keep all the composer and titlelabels at a uni{brm height throughout thecollection regardless of the height of thebinder on which they appear.
Port{blios (a stifT case with lbur llapenclosures) or boxes are sometimes mad-ein-house fbr music materials. One libraryhas all portlblios made outside the libraryand does not use boxes. All rare materialis removed lrom that music library and isadded to the special collections depart-ment. Some libraries use a combination ofboxes and port{blios made by a prof'es-sional bindery and made in-house. Five ofthe libraries contacted make a concertede{lbrt not to use portfblios or boxes. Whensuch methods are needed. use is dictatedby the tpe of protection required by thelormat or the condition ol the materials.In three of the eighteen libraries in thisstudy, both portlblio.s and boxes made in-house are used lbr rare or brittle items, orlor scores that are accompanied by partsthat are rnuch l:uger than the score <rr lbr
which the pafis are very thick. The label-ing on the outside of all these containersin thelibraries surveyed is the same as thatdone tor scotes.
Certain rnusic publishers are showinqan increa^sed reliante on spiral binding I#twentieth century music. These scorei areo{ien large in dimension, but cover a widerange in terms of'pagination, liom verythin to filiy nr r"r,"^nty-liue pages. As wasmentioned earlier, these scores present arnajor problem lor rnusic libraries. In this
"lacing" these scores and then using apam-binder. It was not clear what wasmeant by "lacing," but it seemed that theprocedure was not the same as "lace-back-ing" a bool<. Three libraries mentionedthat they try to avoid the problem by notbuying spilal-bound scores {br theii col-lections.
A linal consideration in the binding ofmusic scores is the shelving ol the items.There has been a discussi,on on the In-ternet recently of the idea o{'shelving theentire library collection in one call num-ber run, intershelving oversize, rniniature,videorecordings, sound recordings, com-puter software, and so on. No one in thissurvey {bllows that practice within themusic library Only-one library inter-shelves both-miniature scores und u,r"r-size with "regulzu" materials. Another li-
LRTS o 40(1) o BindingConoentions /39
brary .shelves all sizes of print materialstogether with the exclusion of oversizematerials. Half of the libraries in the sur-vey maintain three call number sequenceslbr scores: one for "regular" materi-al.s, onelbr oversize, and one fbr miniature scores.One library has one sequence each lbr"regular," oversize, and {bho. Two librar-ies I'urther divide this organization by clis-tinguishing oversize as either quarkr- or{blio-. The remaining fbur libraries haveonly two divisions, "rJguhr" and oversize.As a point ofinterest, the size of"oversize"varies liom thirty-six to lbfty centimeters.
CoNCLUSIoNS
Strictly lrom a presewation standpoint,many practices of the libraries in this sur-vey sample are not sound. To achieve anysort of preservation lunction, binders,pockets. labels, and tape must all be acid-fiee. Starrles must be removed. Adhesivernust be pH neutral PVA (polyvinyl ace-tate adhesive) to ensure long-time stabil-ity. Much lesearch has been done on thepreservation of books and paper. Much ofthis work can be applied direitly to musicmaterials. Scores at least look like a bookand are generally made of paper.
However, music materials add a {'ewvariables not at issue {br the nreservationol books. Scores sold lbr nerlbrmancepurposes are lierluently stapled into pa-per covers when published. They veryolien are published with a loose leal'in thecenter. The presence or absence of partsbecomes an issue, because if each part isnot to be bound separately, it must belinked in some way to the score. This usu-ally means introciucing glue or tape orextra covers that might in{luence the acidcontent of the item.
Musicians have traditionally beentaught to "write it in" when given perlbrm-ance instructions. Most have learrred t<ruse pencil, but when a pencil is not athand, anything will do! These markingscan be seen as mutilation or. on occasion.they can add to the historical value ol'thescore itself. Annotations in per{brmanceparts can create a problem {br school,college, or university libraries trying tobalance their attention between rrerf'cum-
40/ LRTS . 40(1) . Tibbits
ing and research functions (clean editionsoicontaining the markings o['a signilicantperformer <x conductor f<lr research useversus heavily marked perlbrmance parts)(Honea 1989, f54).
mittee, which has presented workshopsand precon{'erences in conjunction withthe association'.s annual meetings and {brmeetings of the ALA, the Association ofRecordid Sound Collections (ARSC), andthe International Association of Music Li-braries, Archives, and DocumentationCentres (IAML).
and maintained. Besides providing a sta-ble and acceptable environment in termsol'heat, humidiry and lighting, preserva-tion must involve carelul control of thebinding policies applied to all items inthese collections. Because music scores
the music library {br an extended lengthof t ime.
WoRKs CrrED
Bloomberg, Marty. 1985. Introduction to tech-n i c' ul si ro i cc s' f t, r I i b r un t t e c h n i ci a n s. \t -
tleton, Colo.: Libraries iJntimited.
Falconer, foan O. 1973. A harrdiguide kr do-it-
yonrs"if music binding. Wi'lson library
bu.Iletin 48: 332-35.
Codden, Irene P I99I. Librury technicul
seraices: OTterations antl mnnagement' 2d
ed. San Diego: Academic Press.
Gottlieb, Jane. 1994 Working against theodds: Preservation approaches in a cotrser-vatory library. In l(notaingthe score: Pre-
seroing collLcilons of rinic, ed. MarkRoosal Chicago: Association lbr LibraryCollections & Technical Services, 12-34.
Honea, Ted. 1089. Conservation and preser-vation. ln Modern mttsic librarianship : Es'suys inhonor of ArtthWatanabe, ed. Al{redMinn. Stuyvesant, N.Y.: Pendragon Press,
r43-55folrnson, Arthur W. f978. The Thames anrl-
Hudson manual of bookbindi'ng. London:Thames and Hudson.
Lawton, Dorothy. 1937. Bin&ng problems in
. music: Methods and costs. No,fes 5 (Nov.):
24-28Library Binding Institute._ 1986' t'-ibraru
Binding Insiiltde slundurtl for librarybinding. Sth ed. Rochester , N.Y: The Li -
brary Bin&ng Institute.
MerrillOldham, fan, and Paul Parisi. 1990
Gui.de to the Library Bincling Institutestunrlarrl for library blndlng Chicago:ALA.
Miller, Catharir-re K. 1966. Binding and circu-
lation. In Manual of music librarianshiTt,ed. Carol June Bradley. Ann Arbor, Mich.:Music Library Association, 58-64.
Roberts, Matt T. 1976. The library binder.Li.brary trends 24 (Apr.):749-62'
Roosa, Mark, ed.. 1994. Knottsi'ngthe Score:Presensi.ng collections of music Chicago;Association lbr Library Collections &Technical Services
/4r
The Worsl of lhe Worsl:Celebroling Twenty Yeo rsof the Worsl Seriol Title Chongeof the Yeor Aword
Morgorel Mering ond Pomelo Simpson
Serials librarians untangle some of the most complicated blbliographlccontrol problems. The year 1994 marked the hnentieth annioersary of thebest knoun attempt at consciousness raising: the Worst Serial Title Changeof the 'Iear Atoard. Among significant efforts to lower the nurnber of possibletitle change.s uas the implementation of the second edition of the Anglo-American Cataloguing R:ules. Librarians contirrue to uork on initicr.tioes toimprooe commanication uith publishers antl to increase euareness of prob-lems ctrused by title changes. While much uork has been dnne to decreasethe rrumber of neu.t blbliographlc records for title changes, there remninsroomfor improoement andfurther streamlining. We propose that the UnitedStates Nerospaper Programb cataloging guideline--<ohich specifies that if atitle change lasts for less than one year and then reoerts back to the preoioustitle, the chunge does not require a neu; record4e extended to all serials.ln addi,tion to the changes proposed aborse, more empirical research isneedpd to aid serial catalogers in handling title changes.
-r
D erials librarians have the job of untan- theywonderwhether all these chzrnges eregling some of the most complicated bibli- necessary. At times it seems that publish-ographic control problems in the library ers are united in a conspiracy againstworld.Theirworkrequiresanalyzingnew them, or, at the very least, that titlepublication.s and answering many diflicult changes hke the one lrom Animul Nutri-questions: Is this a monograph or a serial? tion {-r Health to Animal Heahh b Nutri-Should the supplement have its own rec- tion are capricious and arbitrary. Histori-ord? Should each supplement be treated cally, serials Iibrarians have tried to mo&fyas a monograph? Is this a minor variation catalog rules to avoid title changes and toin title or an actual title change? Serials communicate with publishers about thelibrarians are justi{iably proud o{'their ex- efl'ect title changes have on work in librar-pertise, and most of them do in f'act enjoy ies. The year 1994 marked the twentiethproblem solving. Occasionally, however, anniversary of the best known attempt at
Mnnclner MenINc is Principal Serials Cataloger at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln anda past member of the Worst Serials Title Change of the Year Award Committee([email protected]); PeMsra SIMPSoN is Serials Cataloging Librarian at Pennsylvania StateUniversity ([email protected]). Manuscript received March 16, 1995; revised October 11,1995; accepted for publication November 1, 1995.
42/ LRTS . 40(1) . Meringandsimpson
consciousness raising: the Worst Serial Ti-tle Chanee of the Year Award.
Librar-ians United to Fight Costly, Silly,Unnecessary Serial Tit le Changes( LUTFCS USTC), pronounced loot-fi-sus-tic (Title Varies , Dec. f 973, 3), began thetradition of giving this award. At the lall1973 Michigan Library Association Con-I'erence, LUTFCSUSTC was lbrmed withthe goal of educating publishers in ahumor-ous wayaboutthe processing costs andotherproblems associated with title changes.ihev soon ralhed serials librarint-,r ̂ torJth"Uniied States to join their cause. Under theIeadership of David C. Taylor, serials librar-ian at Michigan State University and laterundergraduate librarian at the University ofNorth Carolina at Chapel Hill, the grouppublished its newsletter, Title Varies, ftom1973 to 1980. It alertedits readers to "awful"
title changes, revisions to catalog rules af-{'ecting title changes, ways of educatingpub-lishers about title changes, and other prob-lems associated with the handline of serialnublicatit-rns.'
In july L974, at the business meetingof the American Library Association'.s(AI-A) Resources & Technical ServicesDivision (now known a^s ALCTS, the As-sociation for Library Collections & Tech-nical Services), LUTFCSUSTC began thetradition of awarding Worst Serial TitleChange ofthe Year Awards. Since 1983, acu*mitt"" of the association'.s Serials Sec-tion has nresented these awards. Accord-ing to this twenty-year-old tradition, ap-proximately ten publishers are recognizedfor title changes they have made duringthe past year. Awards often go to publish-ers whose serials seem to have changed lbrno apparent reason or that have simplyshuflled the order of the words in the title.Serials that repeatedly change their titlesare also good candidates {br awards Aspecial category known as the Snake in theGrass or the Et Tfu Bntte award is reservedlor library science publishers. One of theten nominated pubiishers receives the du-bious honor o{ having the veryworst titlechange of the year (see appendlx A)
Each year, calls lbr nominations ap-pear in tlre ALCTS Neussletter, Cutalog-irg {., Classificution Quurteilq, theNASIG Neusletter, Serials Reoieu, and
Technical Trends. Several times a year re-ouests fbr nominations are sent to thedlectronic discussion groups AUTOCATand SERIALST. The deadline fbr submit-ting nominations is a month or two be{brethe Ar,n*s Annual Con{'erence. The WorstSerial Title Change of the Year Commit-tee evaluates the nominations and assignsawards to worthy title changes. Theawards are presented at the annual meet-ing of the Association oI'Library Collec-tions & Technical Services (ALCTS), andnotices are published in several libraryscience publications.
Publishers are not normally notified oftheir awards. However, in 1990, ALCTSexecutive director Karen Muller person-ally accepted an award {br the title changeRTSD Neusletter to ALCTS Neussletter.Also that year, the award notices werepublished {br the first and only time in anonlibrary publication, the Chroni'cle ofHigher Education.
Since the lbrmation of LUTFCSUSTC,one of the most sisni{icant eflbrts in lower-ing the number ol possible title changeswas the imnlementation of the second edi-tion of the Anglo-Americun Cataloguingtutles' (AACR2) rule 21.1B2. According tothis rule, seria.ls are entered under corpo-rate bodv onlv if the work is about thecomorate bodv itself or its activities(AACB2197S, 285-86). This rule greatlylimits the number of titles that can beentered under corporate body. When acorporate body changes its name, onlythose serials actually entered under thebody and those whose unilbrm titles havebeen qualified by the narne of the bodyrerluire a new bibliographic record.
Another attempt to reduce the num-
Iier and the place of publication change.s,a new record is not created. Opponents o{'
What does not constitute a title changehas been clarilied and expanded over t[epast twenty years. The wider use of theOCLC Online Computer Library Center,lnc., and other bibliographic utilitiesbrought a need lbr more- cooperative,standardized cataloging and thus the in-creased need tbr interlreting and revisingcataloging rules. The-lirst edition of th6AACR states that changes in title "so slightthat they do not a{I'ecithe location of lhetitle in an alphabetical {ile, or conceal theidentification ofthe parts" are noted in ageneral statement such as "Title variesslightly" or "subtitle varies" (AACR 1967,
. fl:;rrt"'
in the representation of
. Additions, deletions, or changes alterthe fitih word that do not chanqe themeaning of a title;.
o Addition or deletion ofarticles, prepo-sitions, or conjunctions;
r Addition or deletion of the issuingbody at the end ol the t i t le; and
. Changes in the punctuation of'the title.Full-Tength
"rii,.l"* about serial title
Varies, as did Gorman in an article the
hy title changes. He oll'ered examples ofsiily title cha"nges, citing a letter io TiIIeVaries as evidence that LUTFCSUSTC
LRTS .40(1) o TheWorstoftheWorst /43
was making an impact on the publishingcommunity (Robertson 1979, 418).
Foggin, on the other hand, argued thattitle changes are usually.iustified, at leastlbr the publisher, and that the costs lorIibraries-are not really a^s high as othershave claimed. She portrayed librarians assuppliers to the readers, who are the realcustomers, suggesting that we should per-haps not presume to tell publishers howto manage their product (Foggin 1992). Itcould also be argued, however, that librar-ies are themselves important customersfor publishers, and that librarians havemore opportunities to work with readersas they search {br and use serial publica-tions than do most oublishers.
Severul authors describe studies inwhich they examined the rate and impactof title chanqes. Charbonneau looked atOCLC recorils lbr about 1,250 titles. Hedivided the number of title chanqes helbuncl in these records by the num"ber ol'years the serials had been published andcame up with an approximate rate ofchange lbr all serials, This {brmula provedrelatively accurate {br the sciencejournalsin his sample as well as those in other{ields of study. He christened his {brmulaTaylork Constant, in honor of David Tay-lor (Charbonneau I982). A l'ew years later,Khosh-khui took a smaller iamnle ofOCLC serial reconls and correlatid therate of change with other variables, sucha.s language, place ofpublication, and sub-ject matter. He {bund that serials pub-lished by governmental bodie.s, those inFrench or Polish, and those in the sci-ence.s changed more ofien than others(Khosh-khui i986, 91). Roberts, Vidor,and Bailey determined cost and time re-quired fbr recording title changes in theirlibrary (Roberts, Vidor, and Bailey 1986-87). A{'es and Wrynn c:uried out a two-part study of biomedical titles that wasdesigned to establish the efl'ect of titlechanges on medical libraries and the per-centage o{'title changes that appearetl tobe iusiified. Thev lbuird that two'-thirds ol'their sample had changed title due to achange in scope or in the terminologrused"in the fi;ld. Thev were unable ioascertain a clear reason'{'rrr the remainingtitle changes.
44/ LRTS . 40(1) . MeNngand Sim,pson
Another hot topic in the literature con-tinues to be the suitability ofusing succes-sive entry cataloging in an online inte-
ern University Library became wellknown lbr departing fiom using succes-sive entry cataloging exclusively. They es-tablished guidelines {br specific catego-ries ol title changes to be handled by latestentry cataloging, the convention of re-cor&ng the latest title as the main entryand listing earlier titles in a note field(Case et al. 1988, 4l). Cole suggests thealternative <-rf having the earliest title asthe main entry and listing later titles in anote field (Cole 1986, 5). Those advocat-ing the use o{ earliest or latest entry cata-loging believe these methods providernore ellicient and economical means ofhandhng title changes than does succes-sive ent"ry cataloging. They point out thatthese methods keep all bibliographic, or-der-holding, and circulation in{brmation{br a serial and its title changes availablewith one search. In other words, eitherconvention eliminates the need to consulttwo or mor-e records to gather infbrmationon each title change Th" ,tt" of one re-cord also saves computer storage sPace, aswell as searching and retrieval time. Theseadvantages benefit libraries, their person-nel, and patrons (Andr6 et al. 1986, 42-43) .
Today, librarians continue to work onseveral initiatives to improve communica-tion with publishers and to increaseawareness of problems caused by titlechanges. One example is the NorthAmerican Serials Interest Groupt Cata-loging Discussion Group, which o{I'ers albium {or serials librarians, vendors, andpublishers to discuss issues surroundingiitle changes and other related issueslAlso, the Af,CfS Serials Section has pub-lished a 1995 brochure called "What'.s in aName?" It provides guidelines {br peri-odical publi-ations based on ANSI Stand-ard Z,59.I, American National Standardfor Periodicals Format and Arrangement.
The brochure includes infbrmation onwhat constitutes a title change and theproblems that such changes cause lbr Ii-lrraries. as well as instruciions {br obtain-ing an International Standard Serial Num-Uer (tSStrt). Publishers often contact anational ISSN center befbre a new serial
Of course, some publishers do not contactISSN centers, and thev are often the oneswho are unaware of'the consequencestheir decisions have lbr libraries.
Another excellent example of librarians working directly with publishers toreduce unnecessary title changes is therecent development of title guidelines bythe Institute of Electrical and Electronic
decrease the number of new bibliographicrecords fbr title changes, there remainsroom {br improvement and f'urtherstreamlining. Crystal Graham has saidthat, while the Worst Serial Title Changeof the Year Award is ofien deserved, "in
other instances, the award should prob-ably go to AACB2 for requiring silly,costly, unnecessary, confusing_ successiverecoids" (Graham 1995, 10). She cites theexample ol'the Atluntit' Monthlq changingits title back and lorth between Atlanticald Atlantic Monthla, and asks whetherbetter bibliographic access is provided-hythe existence of live separate records lorthis serial.
Although AACR2 reflects attemPts toimprove the situation as mentioned ear-liet in some cases the insistence on suc-
cessive entry fbr mo.st change.s has re-sulted in databases that are cluttered withunnecessary successive records. Catalog-ing rules do not currently provide enoughinstruction to delineate between trivial ti-
considered a title change.We propose that the United State.s
The authors lurther suggest a Library ofCongress Rule Interpreiation to reversethe dictum of rule 2l. lB3, " i l ' in doubt,consider the title proper to havechanged. " Another area thCauthors wouldlike reviewed is the choice of qualiliers {brunilbrm titles. Havens believes uniformtitles should be eliminated altogether, andollers several alternatives {bi provi&ngacce.ss to generic title.s (Haven.s 1987, 68).Turitz I'eels that users are not well served
LRTS . 40(1) o TheWorstof theWorst /45
.succes.sive entry cataloging have on librarycatalog users? Has the rate oftitle changeschanggd in the past twenty yearsP Hbwdoes the rate difi'er by discipline, and what
practical, and serve users well. Theyshould continue to work with the publish-ing community to ensure their under-standing of the implications of titlechanges. Nevertheless, as long as serialsare published, title changes will continueto occur, as will a desire to alleviate lrus-trations by laughing at those changes thatare co-stly, silly, and unnecessary. Hope-{'ully, the-Worit Serial Title Change of iheYear Award will be around to lill that need.
Wonxs Crrno
AIe.s, Van B., and Paul E. Wrynn. 1993.Biomedical journal title changes: Reasons,trends, and imp act. Bulletin of the MedicalLi.brary Association 81: 48-53.
ALCTS 1990. Activities at the annual ALCTSmembership meeting. ALCTS neusletterr'. 5Y-62
ALCTS 1991 ALCTS awards presentations.ALCTS newslctter 2: 59-64-
ALCTS. 1992. Worst serial title change of yearawards, 1992. ALCTS neusletter 3:62-64.
ALCTS. 1995 What's in a natne? Presentationguirlelines for serial prrblications. Chicago:Serials Section, Association fbr LibrirvCollections & Technical Services, ALA.
Andr6, Priscilla W., Elisabeth lanakiev, MaryM. Case, antl Kevin Randali. 1986. Serial.scontrol in an online integrated system: CanIatest entry cataloging hllp? Citaloging ttclassification quartedy 7, no. 2: 39-53.
Anglo-American catalogu.ing niles. 1967.North American text. Chicago: ALA.
Anglo-American cataloguing niles. 1978. 2ded, Clricago; ALA.
Anglo-American cataloguing niles 1988. 2ded., 1988 rev Chicago: ALA.
Butler, Todd. 1990. The neuspaper cataloginganrl union listi.ng mznuaL Washington,D.C.: Cataloging Distribution Service, Li-brary ofCongress.
Case, Mary M., Elisabeth Janahev, Kevin M.Randall, and Bradley D. Carrington. 1988.
New On TheINTERNET
A COMPREHENSIVEELECTRONICRESOURCE
of scholarly publicationsfrom the members of the
Association of American
University Presses
FREE ACCESSto bibliographic informationon more than 65,000 titles
USER.FRIENDLYPROCEDURES
using author, title, keywords,
subist category or publisher
name
EASY ORDERINGINFORMATION
Using customized orderforms from participating
Presses
The Catalog contains fully
searchable bibliographic data
and descriptive text from mote
than 50 scholarly publishers.
The Asoc alion of Ame.lcan Unrve.s'ty Presses, Inc
584 Brcadway . Suite 4l0 . NsYork NY 100 2
46/ LRTS . 40(l) . Meringand Sim.pson
Rules for latest entry cataloging: North-western University Library supplement toAACR2. Cataloging l: classi'fication quar-terly 9, to.2: 4l-54
Charbonneau, Gary. 1982. Taylor's constantSerialslibrorian.7, no l: 19-22.
Cole, Iim E. 1986. Tlre lirst shall be last: Ear-lie.st entry catalo grng. Serials librarian lL,no 1 :5 -13
Foggin, Carol Motrroe. 1992. Title clratrges:Another view. Sarials libntrian 23, nos.1/2: 71-83.
Gordon, Anne 1994. 1994 Worst Serial Title
Change Awards. ALCTS rwusletter 5, noJ' . tz
Corman, Michael. 1975. The current state o[standardization in the cataloging of serials.Libranl resotffcas b technical seroices 19"
301-I3.Craham, Crystal 1995. What's wroug with
AACR2: A serials perspective. Paper pre-sented at the ALCTS AACR2000 precorr-{erence, lune 22, 1995, in Chicago.
Havens. Carolyn. 1987. Proposed changes irrthe cataloging ol serials
-wlth generic and
unitbrm titles. Serials librarian 13, no' 4:59-60
IEEE 1995 IEEE implements new titlingplan firr conl'erence prot'eedirrgs. IEEE
iuhlicationshulletin 26, no' 2: I-2.
Khosh-khui, A. (Sam). 1986. Title changes andvariations in other components of serialsSerials librarian 11, no. 2:83-92.
Kuhns, Kathleen. 1976-77 Serials Iibrariausand tlreir discontents Serials librariun I,no.2r 173-tJI .
O'Neill, Rosanna M. 1993. Worst serial title
clrang,e awartls. ALCTS neusletter 4:80.
Roberts. Constance F., Ann B. Vidor, andDorothv C. Bailev. 1986-87. Time and costarralysii o{ title clranges in serials SerialsIibrarian 11, nos. 3/4: 137-42'
Robertson, Howard W 1979. What every seri-
als nublisher should know about unneces-sary title changes. Serials li,brarian 3, uo.4:417-22.
RTSD. 1981. Worst serial title changes an-ntrunced. RTSD neusletter 6:54.
RTSD. 1988. Renorts of committee and dis-cussion groups. RTSD neusletter 13: 42-D . t .
RTSD. 1989. Reports of oommittee and dis-cussion groups. RTSD neusletter 14: 39-46
Title Varies. 1973-1980.Turitz, Mitch L. f990. Unifbrm titles lbr seri-
als: Tlle controversy continues, Serials re'
o ieu 16. no. l : 85-89,98
ArpnNprx A
Below is a list of the winners of the WorstSerial Title Chanee of the Year Awardsover the past twenty years, together withexceryrts ol the ac.companf ng citation.
7974-In recognition ol their meaningless titlet'lranging and meritorious bibliogriphic ob-f uscation, Librarians United to Fighi Costly,Silly. Unnecessary Serial
.Iitle Clranee
:rwards Williams and Wilhns with Worst Se-rial Title Change ol'Ge Year. 1973, lbr theridiculous chaige International lournal ofObstetrics antl dynecology to Iniemati.onilJoum.al of Gynecology and Obstetrics (TltleVaries, SepL. 1974, 36).
7975- .. . and the winner is, Martin psychi-al.ri<' Research, Inc., Ibr the change: Cor-rectioe nni Sotiul Psychiutnl to Joltrnu! ofApplie,tl Behuaior Techn,,[ugy, Melhoi,andTherapy (Title Varies, Jult i975, 28)!
1976-The contest was fierce, but in the endthe library pro{'essiont own worst titlechange previiled a.s tle clrampion wor.st.T'he Mountain/Pkin Libraru Association
Qttutlcrlry became the MPLA Ncoslettu,rin 1975 and continued to demonstrate thatno one is more insensitive to library prob-lem.s than librarians (Titb Variei, Seot.1976, 36).
1977-This lovely engraved silver platter isawarde<],
"*bl"rnuli" ol'the seco-'nd worst
serial title change award {br 1976, to theEconomist Intelligence Unit, Ltd. of Lon-don, lbr its changes of the QER. , . toQuarterly Economic Rersieo of .. . This isa set ofapproximately one hundred relatedtitles, eacir u *"pur"[" periodical with thetitle originally,
-Quurtirty Economic Re-
oieu: Italy, Quarterly Ecorutmic Reai.eu:Spai.n, and so on. In 1975, they changed toQ-ER: Italy, QER: Spzin, etr.. In 1978 theyall changed, every last one of them, toQuarterly Economic Ret:ieu of ltaly,Q"qrt"|A Economic Reoieo of Spai.n andso fbrth. In recognition of the cost to li-braries and the total uselessness of thesechanges, we are naming QER not only sec-ond worst, but third worst and {burthworst-in Iact one hundred title chanqeawards, including worst of all (Title Variis,Nov. Ig76 lpublished luly 1977], aa)
1978-The title change of the year-and theSouth-Will-Rise-Again-Suh hward is givento The Southern Conlerence EducationalFund lbr the change from Southern pa-triot t<t Sutthent Smqgle (Title Varies,July-Nov IUTZ [publ ished 1978], 44).
LRTS o a)Q). TheWorstof theWorst /47
1979- . . . was awarded to Justus Liebigs An-nalen tler Chemie. whit.h has been aioundsince 1832 (with only three other titlechanges) and {inally decided to start overin 1979 (with no. I) as Liebigs Annalen derC he mi e lTitl e Varlas, May-Slpt. 1979. 28)l
1980-The Great Award, Worst of the Worst,also known as the Crand Turkey, goes to apublisher who should have known better:to the United Nations' Educational Scien-tilic and Cultural Organization lbr chang-irrg the UNESC O Bulletin fr'r Libruries iotlre UNESCO /ournal of lnforruttion Sci-ence, LibrariunshiTt, and Archiaes Adnini-stration (TitleVaries, Dec. 1980, 38).
1981- . . . went to the American Associationfor the Advancement of Science, in recoq-nition of their help and concern lbr thecause of universal bibliographic control,and their deliberately stupid, aggressively,militantly, and reliably dumb editorial de-cision to {ly in the lace of all reason, and torename their magazine each year. Theaward goes to Science 79, to Science 80,anJ, ro Science BI, and no doubt next yearScience 82 (RI'SD 19S1)
1982- . . . presented to the U.S. Departmentof the Interior's Bureau of Land Manage-ment ibr clranging Our Ptiltlic Lanrls ktYour Public Lanrls. Also known as the ThisLand is Your Land, This Land is My Landaward. o
1983- . . , pre.sented to the American Soc.ietyof Civil Engineers Ibr clranging sixteen ti-tles all at once. For example, its Construc-tion Divisioni,/ournal of the Constn.tcti.onDioision changed to Jotrnal of Constntc-tion Engineering and Management.o
1984- . . as well as the Most Fantastic TitleChange Award is presented to the Divisionof Continuing Education at Florida Atlan-tic University, lbr the changes drat a singlepublication has gone through since Jariu-ary of tlris year. Fantasg Neusletterchanged in January 1984 to Fantasy Re-oiaro. It changed again in March to SF andFantasy Reoieu, when it absorbe d ScienceFiction and Fantasu Book Reoieut. InApril, it clranged again to simply Fantasy.Each issue also uses several of these vari-ations in various positions on the publica-t ion. '
'Supplied by Frank E. Sadowski, Jr., University ol'Rochester, a past presenter of the Worst Serial TitleChange ofYear Award
lFrom the archives ofthe Worst Serial Title Chanseol the Year Committee
48/ LRTS . 40(1) . Meri,ngandsimpson
1985-. . . also the Incitement to ViolenceAward to the Center fbr Women's PolicyStudies Ibr: Resrtonse to Yiolence i.n theFomily b Sexual'Assutlt, [which] cllangedto Response to the Victimi.zution of WomenandChi.lclren. Since i3s birth in 1976, it hashad fbur other titles.r
1986- . . also the Why Bother to Change theTitle Award goes to the Watt PublishingCompany fbr retitling Animttl Nutri!,ion CtHetlih as Animal Heilth 6 Nutrition.l
1987- . or the Multiple Disaster Award,has been earned to John Wiley fbr againclranging the names of all parts of tl..eJour-nal of Polymer Sci.ence, and to add to thedisasteq also playing musical chairs withthe lettu d"rilnitio"n of each part.l
1988- . . as well as. the Globe Trotter'sAward is presented to North AmericanPublishing.Co., who decided to go globetrotting a{Ier thirty years of stability.Called American Import lz ExTtort Bull'etin{iom 1934 to 1974, it has had seven titlechanges since then, six within three years,three of them occurring in 1987 (RTSD
1988,53).1989-. - . soes to PSC Publications, which
merged-ihe basic and deluxe editions ofAmaricun Home Arts Needlecraft for To'daq to form Needle b Craft. The commit-tee wonders lwhetherl they were trying toreturn to their roots since they started asNeedle Cr ?hrecd (RTSD 1989,46).
1990-. . . goes to IEEE fbr changing theIEEE Journal of Roboti,cs und Automationto IEEE Transactions on Robotit;s andAutomation (ALCTS 1990, 62).
64).1992-. . . goes to Rohrich Press of Akron,
Olrio, fbr changing the Blue Book of Sr
and diff'erent "winning" combinations(ALCTS rssz).
1993-. . . goes to Broaelcasting and CubleIearbook. Bowker has had the title lbr two
vears and has already published it underiwo di{Ierent titles: tire [albrementioned]and Broad.casting and Cable MarketplaceFor a publication that has had more titlechanges than we care to discuss, we askBow[er to pick one and stickwitl-r it, please(O'Nei l l 1993)!
l99it- . . . is presented to Bnmon's for te-turning to its original title alter a briefS2-veir experimeut as Barron's NationalBuiiness ind Financial Weeklg. After 52years couldn't they have waited {br a newvolume to make the change (Gordon
1994)? [Author's note: The original title
was simply Barron's. In 1994, the title
clranged from Barron's National Bttsinessanrl Finuncial Weekly back to Barron's.f
/49
Whot Users Reolly Think:How They See ond Find Seriolsin lhe Arts ond Sciences
Loonne Snovely ond Kotie Ctqrk
.I-lI he motivation lbr this article came
Irom a colleague, a serials cataloger, whochanged iobs ind came to work aia re{'er-ence desk, and was surprised at how muchtrouble users had lindinq serials. As a cata-loger, her idea of a typicil user was a muchmore sophisticated one than she met atthe de.sk. As re{'erence librarians who areon the front lines and are constantlv an-swering very basic questions from {irst-tim_e users, we were just as sulprised tofind out that she *"i urr"*are^of these
gain insight into how people actually use[he cataiog records r.ie slpend so much
time creating, whether the records reallyprovide the help catalogers think they do,where exactly the records {'all down on thejob, etc." (Riemer 1994).
The truth is that for many library pa-trons, in particular undergraduates andother first-time users, finding a journal isa- mysterious and often {iustrating processthat starts long befbre they actually havea serial record displayed on the onlinecatalog. These users are often {'amiliarwith small school or public libraries andare frequently accuiiomed to a short
log, database, or list specifically devotedto serials.
LoeNIrr sNavrrr is Head, Arts Library ([email protected]) and KArrE cr-ARK is Head, Li{'eSciences Library ([email protected]) at Pennsylvania State University. This report is basedon a presentation made at the Association lbr Libiary Collections & Technical Seri'ices, Serialssection, Research Libraries Discussion Group, Miami, Fla., fune lgg4. Manuscript receive<lJuly 7, 1995; accepted Ibr publication SeptemLer 26, 1995.
50/ LRTS . 40(1) . Snruselq and Clark
The authors have each worked at re{'-erence desks at several difl'erent libraries.
about finding journals and interpretingserial records. Users must negotiate atleast live steps to locate ajournal: Irom (I)
index to (2) iitation to (3) serial record to
describe, but each is a regular problem atthe service desk.
STEP 1Fnou INonx ro CITATToN
oR "flow Do I Fruo Anrrcr-nsoN GLoBAL WARMING?"
While patrons may come to the re{'er-ence desk with a citation in hand, I'ar
to learn that they will not {ind periodicalarticles in the online catalog. They needinstruction on selection of an appropri-ate database, choice ofkeywords, use ofBoolean logic, and so on. These prob-lems have been dealt with lairly exten-sively in the bibliographic instructionand database-searchinq literature. Oncea user has identilied the appropriate in-dex and perfbrmed a relevant search, heor she drust interpret the citations re-ceived. While the-citations from someperiodical databases are simple andclearly marked, many are more complexand do not have labeled displays. Even{br those that do, the terminology isoften confusins to the nonlibrarian. Forexample, the iournal title is olten la-beled "source." a term {'amiliar to alllibrarians but rarely to users, particu-larly undergraduates.
STEP 2Fnou CrrerroN To ONLINE CATALoc
REcoRD, oR "You MneN I HevrTo Do Monntt"
The rest ol'the process, {rom having thecitation in hand to having the article inhand, has been largely overlooked in theliterature. This is possibly due to its beingconsidered mechanical, in contra^st to theintellectual issues of topic delinition andsearch strategy. Users, however, find it acomplex and t ime-consuming process. A{-ter s'pending more time thin they hadallott-ed fbr ihe whole pro.iect on sortingand orinting a list of citations-chosenb"caise c,l'ihe promising wording ol'thearticle titles-they are stunned that theynow have to go to another database. O{tenthis means use of another terminal andlooking each citation up again to see lirstwhether the iournal is owned and then tolind its location. The idea that the librarydoes not own every title indexedastonishes many new users. Like hlking athigh altitudes, it gets harder rather thaneasier the lurther you go.
wHrcH Trrl.s Do I TYPE IN?
Cetting (iom the database printout to theserial iecord in the online catalo[ is notintuitive, understandable, or easy {=or lirst-
Once a user is shown where to {ind the
iournal title on the screen or printout, it isolten abbreviated, ancl abbreviations nor-
abbreviation into the online catalog canmean the di{I'erence between {inding the
LRTS o 40(1) o What Users Realla Think /51
journal (or at least {inding the record) andgoing away thinking the library does notown the journal. For example, a usermight reasonably guess that the title ab-breviated f Am Soc Hort Sci is Journul ofthe American Societq of Horticulture Sci-ence, b:ut it is not. The correct title is
Joumal of the American Society for Hor-ticulture Science. In a large research li-brary, there are so many entries that startwith 'Journal of the American Society,"that the, two would not be near enough lbrsomeone to {ind them when an exacl titlesearch is conducted. A single prepositioncan callse retrieval of a wrong record ornone at all.
Other common nroblems include theincorrect guess that-does produce a result,such as interpreting the abbreviation Am
J Phys as American Joumul of Phqsi.ologyinstead of the correct title, American
Joum.al of Phtlsics.In this instance usersmay actually get to the shelf befbre recog-nizing the mistake. Another is that somejournals use a "catchy" title, containing alittle trick that the user does not perceive.For a title such as Artforum, a search insome online catalogs will not retrieve thetitle when entered as two words ratherthan one, unless a second entry has beenadded. While this seems like a minorpoint, many users will not {ind that the
library owns the journal unless both fbrmsare searchable.
STEP 3Fnou Crurrox
TO SERIAL RECORD. OR"WHAT Dons Tnrs MEAN?'
Once the patron has successlully identi-fied the joumal title and translated {romabbreviated to full title. the battle is over.Right? Wrongl An army o{'con{usion con-fionts the unsuspecting user. For exam-ple, ifwe trace the steps an undergraduategoes through when looking {br one of themost popular journal titles fbund in theLi{'e Sciences Library, Science , itwill illus-trate the possible pitf'alls awaiting the un-suspecting student. Because the word"science" is so common, the patron is firstcon{ronted with dozens of entries. At thisscreen (see ligure 1) users have to be ableto discern the j ournal Science {'rom amongmonographs either entitled Science or in-dexed with Sci ence as a related-title addedentry. Various online catalogs handle thisdiflerently, but in every case the indexscreen produces an overwhelming num-ber of confusing entries.
In a NOTIS catalog, the user must firstrecognize the word "serial," a term that iso{ten un{'amiliar to new users. as the term
Search Rcqueat: T-SCIBNCB Conall Llbrary C.trlogSearch Reaulta: 392? Entrt6! Pound Tlt lc lndcx
_ _ - - - - - - - L C 2 0scrENCB
1 <BAilGKOtr> aerlal2 <CAHBtIfiE> serlal3 <ilAlIllA> Berlal,l <RIYADE SAU> aerlrl5 <SItAlE BAf> serlal5 ADVA}ICBD TBCHNOIOGY <1980>? COMBA?IIIG TEA 1 KII,IAR TNB SCIE{CA RAPORT ON <1979>8 B{ERGY .elID TIIB FUTORE <1973>9 EOIBRGY USB CONSBRVATIoII AIID ST'PPLT A SPECIAI, <19?{>
10 F@D POLITICS BCONOI.IICS M'INITTON AIID RASEAR <1975>11 XORSAN OVBRSBA^S INFOR}IATIOII SERVICB <1973>12 MATERI.EIJS RENBWABI'B AIID NONRENBTABI/A RASOINC <1976>13 |CDONAID DONALD <1952>14 I,IoLBCI'I,BS TO MODBLS AI'VANCBS IN NBDROSCIENCB <1989>
CIITIINUBD d nexl IEgc ----
StArC over Tl4)e nuube! to alLsplay record <PE> toR*ard tEgeIrBLp GurdeOfHer options
Figure l. NOTIS Entry disphy for title Scicrw
o
Kapco presents anent i re catalog of uniqrresel f -adhesive. sel{ -st icL
And finalll,everv Kapco librarvproduct is satisfac-
tion guaranteed, to letYou Know )'ou re gettlng
your monev s worthOI.IRPRODUCTSPROTECTYOIIRBOOKS; PATENTSPROTECT OIIRINGENIIITY
For example, our exclusiveEasy Covero self:adhesive bookcovers are so ingenious and soeasy to use that thev have beengranted U S, Canadian andother patent protect ion.
maeazinc t. ' :Ppta.t
re ln rorce-
ments andsplne repalrwings Nofumbling,lvrinkling, bub-
eruousGlutinosi
HARD AND SOFTBOOKCOVERS I-ASTLONGER; BATTEREDBT-IDGETS STRETCHEARTI{ER
.. Not just an,v selfstick #I.::;,adhesives. Only acid-freeformulat ions which protectboth hard and sof f coverbooks Glutinosity (the rratureofglue) at i ts best
l{'e ingeniousll' engineereach p rod r r c r . con f i gu i i ng i rso that every move you make
You get yur
r r hen l o r r use i t i s smoo l l r r . r .simpler and more efficient.
Our prices are verv com-petitive, too, saving preciousbudget dol lars for growing
,vour collection
Likewise, so have EasyBind' repair tapes and theextremely user-friendly Peel 'n
Placeq centering stl'ip feature.Kapco works very hard todesign.products to makellre easler.BENIMBT.F',. BE
QrircKwTTr{PEEL'NPI-ACE@
Kapco makes workgo faster and easierwith Peel 'n
Place"centenng strlpson taPes,lantinates, The reel
t:":,
)a)'.::. 9: i
bling and premature sticking.The Peel 'n Placeo strip makeslight work of repairs; a Kapcoexclusive.ON-THE.SPOTTRAINING
Most Kapcoproducts aresimple to use,but all comewith completestep-by-steplnstructrons onthe package. Forthe package. lormore details, Kapcowill furnish videocassette instructions.Or, a nearby Kapcofield sales retlresentativewill be glad to come byand show you.SHOPBYMAILORPHONE
presented in full detail withdescriptions, prices and order-ing procedures in our brandnew Kapco library productscatalog.
You now may order anyquantities from the catalogby mail, over the telephonewith one of our courteouscustomer sefuce reDresen-tatives or instantly-by fax.
BLryDIRECTAND SA\/E: Kapco is a
manufacturer,not a warehouser
or jobber We selldirectly to you at best
possible prices Callus today and save.
Request a catalog orask a customer service
reDresentative about one ofour unique Kapco libraryDroducts starter kits. Thev'remoney in the bank (or in thestacks, ifyou prefer).
CALLTOIT-FREE1-800-791-8965
FrlX: 1-800-451-3724LOCAL: 216-678-1626
Ordqg mail,phone ofat
Too numerous to showhere, all Kapco products are
LIBRARY PRODUCTS
54 LRTS . 40(1) . Snaoelq and. Clark
l l 0 l K ' o h s u € h . S c l e c . V o l . l , r c . I ( \ t s . f g r s ) - v . 3 2 , r c . r r ( b .r 9 5 0 t . r 9 1 5 - 1 9 s 0 .
l . terged yl th I .o hsueh shih chib ro for Tau ,an k,o h.u.h. Ju6 1951.llll Haterlatr, rendable and rcDrenesr.bla red@rcer. c19?5.[l2l Hatcriak, reneyabla sd lrfusesabla resourcca- c197C.[13] Ner rcldr to ye6teralay, easays h archaeology. frticlea ero gtencc.
cnca (2? c l t l t
1 1 9 6 6 1 .[ l { l Science. / Caar. , c l ive. l9ot,I l 5 l S c i c n c c . . S c l e r c e ( 1 9 ? 9 - 1 9 8 g ) . t V o I . 1 ; a o . 1 l ( X o v . / D c c . l 9 Z 9 ) _ v .
rc. 6 ( , tuly/A€. 1985) . t9?91 _1906,116l sclenc.. - Sclenc. (neekly). v. 1-2j , pcb 9, ta83-lhr.
a e r , , v . 1 - ( r c . r _ ) ; J e . a , r O 9 5 - . l g 8 3 _ .CoDtbred: Scl6ce, ! reekly Ecord of €clatr,flc progrers.Abaot led: Sciot i l lc @thly. r td, t9S!.
2 3 , l 8 9 t r n d
l lTl Science. / Davi. , l ta CtereIed. l195a_.l lg l Scl6ncc. / Davi. , I ra Clwelud. I tg5g-a11.l l9 l gclenc.- / Flasgu. , tohn ClGlE3. t lst ed. l . t19711 .[20] science. / Rorcd Overseaa InfoMtlon sewice- fgzi .[21] Science. / Shay, petcr. 19?2.
_ - pg, Librarie€ r IARc(Search)/AlI Librarle.
Pre6a or tlTE XEjFT oa W to Bee Eore citatlda.
Figure 2. Citation display fbr title Scienca
that identilies the record they are lookineIbr. They must then know the publisherilocation to select the correct entry Thiscan be especially diflicult for a tiile likeScience,which has changed place ofpub-lication several times. In the icreen sh^<rwnin figure l, the user must select the secondentry even though Sciance has not beenpublished in Cambrldge lor over a cen-
date-period and serial records end in a
screen, new problems arise Users are l'armore accustomed to the inlbrmationgiven on a rnonographic rect-rrd screenthan a serials screen. Not only is the inlirr-mation in serials records dill'erent, it is
lengthier and more complex. The moreinfbrmation included in the record, suchas the three places of publication {br
ters; in other words, the density of in{br-mation should be 30 percent or less. Theideal, supposedly, is tB percent. Ell'ectivedisplays-are open dispiays, with lots ol'empty space used to clarify the importantinformation" (Crawford 1992, 68). Thebrief record used in NOTIS catalogs, withthe option to view more detailed in{brma-tion, constitutes one efl'ective solution tothis problern.
STEP 4HotprNcs luronuerroN,
oR "Do You Hevp Tnrs AnrrcrrOR NOT?!'
LRTS o 40(1) . Wha.t Users Reallq Think /55
but does the u.ser? The term "holding.s"may be meaningless as an indication"ol'ownership. In addition it may not be ap-parent where to look lbr that inlbrmation.For very l<>ng records the novrce cannotdistinguish the critical inlbrmation. spe-cifically the holdings inlbrmation, {i-omthe unneeded inlbrmation.
When the records are very lonq, theholdings inlbrmation can be many sc"reensremoved {rom the lirst screen ofthe rec-ord. Some libraries have solved this prob-
lem by using a brief record display, whichhas the advantage ot'giving the mcrst pert!nent inlbrmation on t]re lirst.sc.reen. How-ever, many ofthese online catalogs, such asNOTIS, re<1uire the user to take a second.step and con.sult an additional screen {brholdings inlbrrnation, no matter how shortthe bibliographic record is. The ideal {romthe patron'.s point ol'view would be a hriel'citation plus a brief hol&ngs statement onthe {irst screen, with more detailed in{br-mation available on request.
been received. For example, u.ser.s lookinqat a record will assume- that the librarv
only own.s the fir.st volume and nothingelse.
The second {iequent misinterpreta-tion occurs when the.publication daie andholdings date difl'er. For example, at PennState the entry {br The tourruil of Biologi-atl Phqsics shows publication dite Ig73-at the top ofthe screen (see {igure 3). Theuser assumes that the librarv owns everv-thing since that date, even though tlieholdines statement at the bottom of thescreen indicates that only issues fiom1989 to date are owned.'Users cannotimagine why a library would put 1973 onthe top of thi.s record when they do notown 1973-1989. Many consider it tanta-
one or more screens.Many, if not most, libraries use the
phrase "current issues" to describe their un-bound holdings. However, very I'ew under-graduates know the library'.s de{inition o{'this phrase. Such terminology is commonlymisinterpreted in two &{I'erent ways. Somethink "current issue" means the most recentissue. Others, who have been told in class tolocate "current infbrmation," think "currentissues" means the past five years or so.
l tournal of bj .ological physicsJouml of biological phy6ic6.
A c a d e m i c , 1 9 7 3 - .Dordrecht; Bo6Eon, K1uwer
v . i l l . 2 4 c m . Q u a r E e r l y"AD ioternaElonal journal fo! the fomulat ion and appLicar ioD of physicat
and mthematical hodels in the biological sclences' , .Previously pu-bl ished by Forum P!e68, St i l lwater, OkIa1 B i o p h y s i c s - - P e r i o d i c a t s .
C a l l # : Q H s 0 5 J 5 5East Pdttee Second Fl.oor, v 17 1989-To DaEe Current I6sues ln Li fe
Sciences i lourGl6 Area, 2nd Flool Ba6t Pat lee
Figue 3. Record screen lbr Jurmal of Biok4lcal phy.tics
PSU Librar ies/Universi ty Park
56/ LRTS . 40(1) . Sntnselq and Clark
Patrons are suqprised to find that whata library considers a current issue couldbeanything lrom the most recent issue toone thaiis several years old, andwhat I'allsinto this category varies from title to title.Because what remains unbound varieswith the leneth of the issues and the fre-quency ol'tlie publication, current issuesul"rv tnor-outlv. Thnt, it is under-standable that {'ew users know what ismeant bv an unbound iournal without anexplanation. Ideally the catalog shouldpr.r"ide infbrmation lbr each-title onwhich issues are considered "current."
STEP 5Tnp Snnr,r. oR "WHERE
Do I Loox Now?"
Because the current issues, bound issues,or a certain range of years are oftenshelved in di{I'erent locations, it is essen-tial that the online catalog make it clear
is in the {iustrating position of havingarrived at the given location only to findthe desired issue is elsewhere. In somelibraries all issues are either arranged al-phabetically by title or by call number,while in others the current issues may bearranged alphabetically by title and thebouni volumes classifi'ed by call number.The cataloe records do not specify howthe issues i" arranged on the sheli. thecall number is usualf gven whether or notit is needed, Ieaving users to figure out ontheir own when to search alphabetically bytitle or when to search by call number.
DrscussroN oFTgonNrrn PnonlnMs
Above we have described problems pa-trons tnrically encounter with lindilg theroutinelournal article. Now we will enu-merate iome of the thorniertypes ofprob-lems that are {amiliar to serials librariansand catalogers, but that can bewilder evenexperienced users. A sampling ol thesep.bbl"., are discussed befow.
"
CORPOMTE BODYAND MAIN
ENrnv PRosLnt\4s
The concept of corporate body entry islbreign and diflicult lbr most patrons.Novice users typically expect entry to beunder "author," and think ofan author asa person who has written a novel, shortstory, or poem-identilication ol' authorsis rarely-emphasized beyond literature
"l"rr",'in hieh school. The idea of an
author beingi comoration or associationis out ol' th"eir realm of' experience andtherefbre diflicult to include in theirfiamework of authorship.
pounded by the way these serials are citedin the literature. In addition to conlusingabbreviations such as "mrr" for miscella-neous publications, the wording of theserial title in the citation may appear to becompletely tlill'erent lrom the main entryand iitle in the cataloq record.
Benson (fg90) hai outlined a discus-sion of the extensive problems users
the need to understand the catalogingrules. However, the problem remainsthat, when a user {indi a citation in theAri Index to Record of the Art Museum
entry is "Record" and the main entry
and princeton," wi l l locate the t i t le.We [now, however, that patrons o{ten
LRTS o a0(1) c What Users Realht Think /57
give up when a title search produces noresults.
Two problems arise with this example.The lirst is pre -AACR2 cataloging that hasnot been changed and continues to pre-.sent problem.s fbr user.s. The second isthat a simple added entry {br {brms oftitles used in citations, especially majorindexing sources, would go a long waytowards helping the user and making col-Iections more accessible. Because cataloq-ers work with the item in hand. this add'i-tional in{brmation gleaned from citationsources and users has to come fiom out-side the cataloging source.
Another main entry problem that con-fuse.s u.ser.s i.s the standard practice of lbr-eignJanguage unifbrm title headings {brjoumals published in English cover-to-cover translations. Ofcourse, users cannotunderstand why there is a {breign lan-guage spine title and catalog record whenthe publication is in Englishl An Englishmain entry with a fbreign-language titleadded entry in the record would be moreuseful fiom the patron'.s point of view.Libraries could also opt fbr a little-usedMARC tag (765 Original Language En-try), so that the fbreign title displays in anote as: "Translation of. . . ."
MoNocnepHs vs SERTESVS PERIODICAL
Publications issued in multiple, noniden-tical lbrmats cause multiple problemsFor example, ArchitecturalDesign is pub-lished first as a periodical, with most of theissue consisting of a numbered pro{ile se-ries called Architectural Design Profile.Each number contains articles on a par-ticular topic and has a distinctive title.Each profile is also issued separately as amonograph, without the introductory ma-terial from the periodical issue. Every.se-rials cataloger can see the problems pre-sented in such a publication. Theproblems are compounded fiom a user'.spoint of view because he or she may vari-ously {ind: (1) a citation to an article in thepro{ile through an index, such as Art Index<tr Aoery Ind.ex to Architectural Periodical;,or to the perio&cal Architectural Design,with avolume, Lssue, and date; (2) a citation
in the literature that refers only to Archi-rectural Design Profile; or (3) a referenceto an apparent chapter or essay in a bookwith the title Free Space Architecture.
Serials catalogers are discouraged, byworkload-induced expediency, in.stitu-tional policy, or other considerations,{rom providing access through the catalogfor all three o{'these potential searches.Either the items are cataloged separately,so that individual titles may be found, orthey are entered under the serial title, butnormally not both. A series tracing is nor-mally available for the Profile whether thematerial is cataloged as a monograph or aserial. Thus. onlv two out of the threesearch avenues aie covered in the catalog.
In such situations we are dependentupon sta{f who are alert to the problemand can direct patron.s to the article theyseek when asked. But how many patronswho f'eel competent using the catalog, andare con{ident they have determined theIibrary does not own it would go to thetrouble of con{irming this with librarystafl? The end result is that patrons mayerroneously conclude the library does notown materials that it does.
PusLrsHnn BLooPERS
Local decisions on how to resolve changesmade by publishers should take into ac-count how the material is indexed, andtherelore how the user is likely to besearching lbr it. Dill'erent users may beserved better by di{I'erent resolutions, sothe librarian may be f'aced with a decisionthat must take into account convenience,logic, library policy, and di{I'erent groupsot users.
A good example of such a maddeningsituation is the case oI Amprican ChoralReoieto andTheVoice of Choru.s Am.erica,two publication.s oI the American ChoralFoundation. Or, they were two separatepublications until the {bundation decided,perhaps to save postage, t<r issue themto[ether. Had the two titles heen corn-bined into one, the solution would be evi-dent; or, i{'the two titles were just mailedtogether there would be no problem. In-stead, the American Choral Reuiew wasinserted and stapled inside The Voice of
58/ LRTS . 40(1) . Snaoelq and Clark
Choru.s Americu. The obvious solution isfbr libraries to detach the inner volume(the cover says "pull out to separate") andcontinue to bind each separately, and pa-trons are none the wiser that there hasbeen a change. However, two complicat-ing {'actors must be taken into account.The first is that the lbundation has begunprinting on th e cover ol'The Voice of Cho-nts Americo not only its own title, volume,number and date, but also American Cho-rnl Ret:ieu, with its volume and number.They have also added the subtitle "Incor-porating the publication of the AmericanChoral Foundation," leading the new userto expect to lintl in that issue both titles.The second f'actor is that the main index-ing source, Music Inclex, cites articles as ifthe two were together. For example, if weare looking {br in article by Chris White,we {ind the entry:
Christ lag in Todesbanden: a setting byHandel C.D Wl.rite. mus VOICE CHO-RUS AM 16:ACRI-2 n3 1993Clearly the new user will interpret this
citation to mean theyshould search forVoiceof Choru.s Americu. So while the initial re-sponse to the {bundation'.s decision to stapleone publication inside the other may havebeen to separate them and maintain thestatus quo, an examination of the ways u*sersare likelyto find them indicates thatkeepingthem together is nowpre{'erable. Long-termusers may be inconvenienced initially, butcan be alerted to the change.
FINDTNG Trrr,e Cua,NcES FRoM THEUsER's Porrur on VrBw
The serials literature is f'ull of debate overwhich method is rrrel'erable lirr ser-ials thathave changed title-successive, Iirst, orlatest entry. Each has its advantages anddisadvantages {rom the user'.s point ofview. Successive entry requires the user tosearch separately lbr each version ot'thetitle. Each of these individual records maybe shorter than latest entry records woulibe, a distinct advantage {rom the user'.spoint of view. However, users must searcheach title-ofien three, fbur, or more-fbr complete retrieval. In addition theyhave to interpret the often con{using ter-minology used to connect the varying ti-
tles, such as "continues," "continued by,"or "absorbed by."
Earliest entry cataloging may be easierIbr the serials cataloger but is probably themost confusing fbr the user, because thetitle at the torr ofthe record retrieved willseldom be thi one he or she sought. Thattitle may be buried deep in a note, whichcan be hard to pick out ofa screen {ull oftext. A title such us Metals Technologrt,which began as Journal/Insti.tute of Metalsbecame Metuls Technologl and mergedwithMetal Science to fbrm Materiols Sci-ences undTechnologa . MST is a nightmareIbr the user no matter how it is cataloged.Whether single or successive entry cata-loging provides clearest access to serialrecords {rom the patron'.s point of view isan issue that needs to be examinedthrough empirical research.
CoNcLUSToNS aND DIREcrroNsFOR FUTURE RNSBENCH
We have pointed out many problems thatcould benefit {rom further research onuser needs in locating journal articles.Relerence librarians get a sense o{'thequestions frequently asked, as well as themore occasional thorny problem. How-ever, we have no idea how many moreusers are smoothly linding thingi them-selves, leaving empty-handed, giving up in{'rustration, or assuming the library doesnot own something that it actually does.
Interlibrarv loan mav be a source ofdata on the fie<pency with which itemsare requested that in f'act are owned.However, these figures are {'ar f'rom com-plete because not all patrons have accessto interlibrary loan, and those who do,{requently do not have the time or moti-vation to pursue that avenue. In addition,we have not examined empirically whatell'ect cataloging rules have on the user'.ssuccessful retrieval. Thus, while we areable to identi{y the types of problems en-countered, we do not know what percent-age of users experience these problems,or how fierluently they experience them.We also do not know how olten links inserial citation databases, {rom "source"I ields to serial bibl iographic recordsin catalogs, via ISSNs common to both,
LRTS o 40(1) . What Users Reallq Think /59
correctly take users to the records theyneed.
Studies such as Wildemuth andO'Neill (1995) begin to explore ways ofincorporating user-oriented perspectivesinto online catalogs However, studieswith a much narrower fbcus will beneeded to explore the complex nature ofserial retrieval.
Many undergraduates come to the li-brary with very little understanding of theresearch process, in particular linding andusing the journal literature. They areIrankly overwhelmed by the complexity ofIarge systerns. Even in the best of all pos-sible worlds it is a difficult, time-consum-ing, complex process. The user must gothrough a minimum of five steps {br eachserial, any one of which may result in aproblem. While further research will helpidenti{y specilic problem areas, we seethree areas where changes can be madenow to heln users.
fhe fir.st is to link holdings lrom peri-odical databases to serial holding recordsExamoles are the multi-databa^se accesssystem (MDAS) product from NOTISand other in-house ellbrts such as PennState Librarie.s' Table of Contents (TOC)databa^se. In these cases database citationsare linked directly to serial records. Thiseliminates the need fbr the user to identilythe title and search the online catalogproperly but still doe.s not resolve theholdings and locations issues. Ideally, pa-trons would like to be able to type in thevolume number of the issue they need andhave the system respond with the exactlocation and shelving arangement
The second area is screen design andrecord in{brmation such as holdinps thatmav be inlluenced bv vendor clecisions ononline catalog design as well as local pol-icy. Wallace (1993,249) recommends that"success{ul screen designs and search en-gines should lbcus first and fbremost onrneeting the quick-searching needs of thernaioritv of users." A short record that isclelr and easy to understancl meets theneeds of rnost users. Extensive notes andother inlbrmation needed lbr clarificationshould be available at the user's rerluest.
In addition, careful attention must be givento wording used. The meaning of wordssuch as source, citation, holdings, currentissues, continuing, series, serial, perio&cal,and index may not be clear to the user.
The third area where changes could beuse{ul are cataloging rules and practices.Rule-making bodies must take user neecliinto <nnsideration (these are really libraryneeds, too). Because the decisions madeabout how titles will be cataloged, how hold-ings will be displayed, and so on have enor-mous, Iong-term implications for users,we need to work together on solutions.
We, the entire library profession , needto refbcus our attention on the users. Howdo they look fbr serials? How do theyinterpret infbrmation on the screen? Forexample, simple title-added entries fbrc,rmmonly cifud fbrms ol the titles, in-cluding abbreviations, would solve manyusers' ind public serwice librarians' head-aches, While rules may allow fbr addingthese entries, local policies and communi-cation barriers may olten prevent them.Also, English main entries and titlesshould be used {br English translations ofserials originally published in another lan-guage. Complicated titles, such'as Archi-teciural Design, require innovative solu-tions to ensure that the user can find the
ever more critical that material the libraryowns can be located by library users. Incases where the rules do not serve the bestinterest ofthe users, the rules should bechanged. In cases where local policy is theissue, those pol icirs should be given re-consideration in light of user needs
We have come a long way in addressinguser needs, but a review of problems indi-cates that there are still many areas wherewe could improve. Meeting customerservice needs will provide us with a chal-lenge in the decade to corne. If librariesare to compete in the inlbt'rnation age,they rnust iake the lead in meeting thischallenge.
60/ LRTS . 40(1) . Snaoelq and Clark
Wonxs CrrnnBenson, Larry D. 1990. The serials catalog: A
view {iom the rel'erence desk. In Sarialsand reference seraices, ed. Robin Kinderand Bill Katz. New York: Haworth, 123-39
CrawIbrd, Walt 1992. Starting over: Currentissues in online catalog user interf'ace de-sign. Informdion technology and librariesII:62-76
Lim, Sue C. 1988. Successive entry serialscataloging: An evaluation. The serials li-brarian 14, :nos. I/2:5. 59-69.
Riemer, fohn. 1994 E-mail to the authors, 24August
Wallace, Patricia M. 1993. How do patronssearch, the online catalog when no one'sIooking? Transaction log analysis and im-plications {br bibliographic instruction andsystem design. fiQ 33: 239-52.
Wildemuth, Barbara M., and Ann L. O'Neill.1995. The "known" in known-itemsearches: Empirical support Ibr user-cen-tered design. College b researchlibraries56: 265-81.
Problem: Lim ited Res o U%
Solution: Outsource
WLN's MARC
Authority Gontrol
to
Record Service (MARS)
MARS. Authority Control. Bibliographic Record Upgradingo Customized Programmingo Manual Reviewo Ongoing Authority Database Updating
o Dalabese Preparationo Smart Barcode Labels. Original Catalogingo Collection Analysiso Conspectus Service
Seruices
And join the many libraries that rely on WLN for efficient and cost effectiveservices. Let the MARS team be your extra staff, invisible yet indispensable.
Contact us at 1€00D|ALWLN, 360-9234000, x 4056, Fax 360-9234009 or eend email to [email protected] PO Box3888 Lacey WA 98509-3888 o
1976
62/
Noles on OperolionsAcquisifions of Hord-to-Find Bockfilesof Chinese Periodicols from lhePeople's Republic of Chino
Peler Zhou
This Ttuper rlescribes the Unioersity of lowa Libraries' experi,ence in purchas-inghard-to-findbackfiles of Chinese Tteriodi.cals from China. It sheds light
. on hou small foreign-language collections in North America can be greatlyenhanced by u.sing u norsel acquisition strateglj und bq understanding thedifferent book mnrket conditions in third-uorld countri.es. The exTteriencesummarized here is unique in.some nspects tnd cun be used bq other libruriesin similar cooperatioe projects in the future
.al, qood Chinese collection must have astrong serials component ofjournals, pe-riodicals, government publications, andconf'erence proceedings that are cla^ssi{iedin the lbllowing three categories:
1. National publications: those pub-lished by major academic publishers,national universities, national re-search institutions, and governmentagencies. Such publications are dis-tributed nationwide in China.
2. Provincial-level nublications: thosenublished bv research institutions atlhe provinci'al level, colleges and uni-versities of various provinces, andprovincial government agencies,which are usually circulated withinprovinces in China.
3. Local publications: those publishedat the municipal or county level, usu-ally with a limited circulation, such ascounty gazetteers or municipal statis-tical reports.
Due to historical reasons and the con-dition of publishing in the People'.s Re-public of China, backliles of such serialpublications in Chinese are mostly out-of'-print today. Microlilms of Chinese peri-odical backfiles are usually limited to onlya lew titles with limited ipans. The ram-page of China'.s Cultural Revolution wasalso a cause fbr the rarity ol such materi-als, a^s it took a toll on all Chinese peri-odicals published from the mid-1960s tothe late 1970s and earlier. It is almostimpossible today to get complete back-runs o{ Chinese periodicals in large quan-tities through the commercial book market.
From 1993 to 1995, the University ofIowa Libraries successl'ully acquired com-nlete backruns ofmore than {bur hundredhard-to-lind Chinese periodicals in morethan seven thousand volumes with thehelp of {bur major Chinese libraries. WithChina'.s open-door policy and broadeningeconomic re{brm, Iibraries in China today
PereR ZHou is East Asian Librarian and Adjunct Assistant Prol'essor of Chinese, University ofIowa ([email protected]). Manuscript received July 12, 1995; accepted {br publicaUonSeptember 12, 1995.
LRTS o 40(1) o Notes on Operations /63
are- more independent, entrepreneurial,and accessible to the outside world. Thishas created an opportunity fbr coopera-tion between U.S. and Chinese libraiie..
greatly enhanced by using a novel acrlui-sition strategy and by understanding thediflerent book markei contlitions in titrd-world countries. The experience summa-rized here is unique in some aspects andcan be used by other libraries in similarcooperative projects in the future.
BecxcnouNp
fbr the purchase and processing of hard-toJind bhinese and Athcan n"eriodical.sincluding current titles and their back-runs. With this lunding, the University o{'Iowa Libraries planneii to add more thanfbur hundred current Chinese periodicalsand their complete backruns i-n humani-ties, social sci6nces, and Chinese healthsciences. Many of the backruns of thoseChinese periodical.s dated back to the1950s.
We {irst contacted the three larqestcommercial bool< vendors in Chinl-China National Publishing Industry Trad-ing Corporation, China InternationalBook Trading Corporation, and China Na-tional Puhlii.ations Import and ExportCorporation-and solicited their help ingetting these materials fbr us. We leamedthat they could get us only small segmentsofbackruns liom used book storesln Bei-jing. Those Chinese vendors indicatedthat it was irnpo.ssible to acrluire the com-plete backluns ol 'al l fbur. hundred-plusperiodicals we wanted, because such ma-terials were mrt available on the Chinesebook market. It was obvious that the lim-ited fragrnents of Chinese iournals thatvendors coultl provide us were of little
help, because our plan was to systemati-cally enlarge and enhance our Chineseperiodicals collection by acquiring theiomplete backruns o{'alt toui hunired-plus titles, which at that time could onlybe lbund in maior Chinese libraries suchas the Chinese'National Library (BeilingLibrary), Shanghai Municipal Libiary,and some natioial Chinese university ii-braries in China.
Cost was another {bctor. One commer-cial vendor olI'ered to microfilm the Chi-nese back{iles {br us {iom the collectionsofthe Chinese research libraries, but thecost fbr micro{ilming f'ar exceeded thefulding we received- {br Chinese peri-odicals, and the time required lbr a micro-{ilming project would have been muchlonger than our grant period.
Given these I'actors, we believed thatthe most cost-efl'ective way of'obtainingthe Chinese backliles was to acquire themdirectly from the existing collections ofsome maior Chinese libraries. We learnedthat Chinese libraries have a tradition ofbuying and storing multiple copies ol Chi-n e.se feriodit.als,
",,ne lbi circu'lation, one
Ibr back-up of circulation, and one firrpermanent preservation. lt would be rnostiesirable il'we could purchase some ofthose duplicate collecti,ons {rom Chineselibraries.-
Mnrrtotor"ocy
We made aproposal to ten Chinese librar-ies, in which we stated our interest inpurchasing their duplicate periodicals at aprice reasonable to both sides. Those tenChinese libraries were:
The Chine.se National Library (BeijingLibrary)
Beijing University LibraryFudan University LibraryWuhan University LibraryZhor rgshan Un iversity Library
Jilin U niversity Llbrany
64/ LRTS . 40(1) . Zhou
Northwest University LibraryHubei University of Medical Sciences
LibraryBeijing Xehe University of Medical
Sciences LibraryBeijing Medical University LibraryMo.st of the libraries responded posi-
tively to our proposal and expressed theirwillingness to participate in the project.We then sent them our "shopping-list" ofChinese periodicals, requesting them tosearch it against their holdings and reportthe search'results to us. This Eibliogtaphicchecking revealed that most of the tenlibraries had the materials we wanted. Wethen selected {bur of the ten libraries asour partners, ba^sed on how complete theirduplicate collections were. The lbur libraries were: Beijing University Library,Fudan University Library, Wuhan Univer-sity Library, and Hubei University of Medi-cal Sciences Library. By inviting these fburlibraries to participate in this project, wecreated a competition amongthem to helplower the cost through a bid&ng process.We also made it clear {iom the beginningthat we would onlybe interested in purchas-ing their duplicates, not their single mastercopies, and that the prices {br those materi-als would be lhir to them.
Duringthe summers of 1993 and 1994,the University of Iowa Libraries sent itsrepresentative to the {bur libraries tomeet with their administrators, negotiateterms of the contracts and prices, inspectthe physical conditions o{ their back{iles,and sign the contracts.
backruns, together with a block price for
also set a six-month deaclline lbr deliveryantl agreed to make a payment uPon re-ceipt of the materials. In the end, all ma-terials arrived on time.
Rrsur,rs
Altogether in the pro.iect, we acquiredoverseven thousand volumes, which com-prised complete backruns of over Iburhundred Chinese periodicals. The fbllow-ing is a cost analysis.
"As shown in table 1, by huying directly
tiom the Chinese libraries, we achievedan average savings of $I5 per bound vttl-,rrn..
",rrrrn"red with the conventional
purcfiase o'l'snch materials through bookvendors. That amounts to more than$105.000 for over seven thousand vol-umes of Chinese periodicals, not to men-tion the {'act that those 611-61-print mate-rials could only be {bund in the existingcollections of a f'ew Chinese libraries. Onthe other hand. to the Chinese librarieswho were our partners, though their unit
TABLE I
CorutrlntsoN oF Cosrs AND TIME
Prrrch*ethrough Vendors
Purchase throughChinese Libraries
Acquisitions rate
Time required lbr completing the project
Price per volume/year
Binding cost per volume/year
Shipping and handling per volume/year
Total: (cost per volume)
30To
unknown
$20
$5
$2
$27
997o
within a year
$12
None (included inprice per volume)
None (included inprice per volume)
$12
price per volume was low, the total pro-ceeds forthese voluminous back{iles werelarge and pro{itable because journal sub-scriptions for re.search librarie.s in China{rom the 1950s to the 1980s were cheap.Thev could easilv offset the cost ofacquir-ing and maintaining tho.se material.s iverthe years and still come out with a largeprolit margin.
This retrospective acquisition proiectwas unconventional in several ways. It by-passed vendors and directly accessed thesources of'such materials. By bulng du-plicate c<lllections directly {rom Chineselibraries. we not onlv saved monev andlabor, but time. In addition, we devjopeda good working relationship with our sisterlibraries in China. Our Chinese partnersall expressed their satisl'action in ihis mu-tually benelicial project. They made hardca^sh byweeding and selling us their dupli-cate collections, and, in turn, used theproceeds to buy some much-neededWestern language publications {br theircollections. Furthermore, by weeding du-plicates, they reduced their storage andpreservation costs. They also used theoroceeds to send their sta{f abroad {brlraining and upgraded their library {'acili-
LRTS o 40(1) o Notes on Operations /65
ties by adding much-needecl equipmentsuch as photocopiers, f'ax machines, andcomputers.
The Univer.sity of lowa Librarie.s planto make backfiles of Chinese rreriodicalsavailable to scholars and rese^archers inthe United States by entering biblio-graphic inlbrmation {br them into the na-tional databases ofthe Research LibrariesInlbrmation Network and the OCLC On-line Computer Library Center, Inc., in-cluding complete holdings information.In addition, we plan to digitize the table.sof contents of some of the rare Chinesejournals, such as those in Chinese healthsciences, and put them on the World WideWeb through the homepage of the EastAsian Collection at the University of IowaLibraries (http//wwwlib .uiowa.edu/ ead).
Building a strong serials collection {brarea studies is costly, and it usually takes along time. We lbund a rluick and e{Iicientway to retrospectively build a solid Chinese periodicals collection within a shortperiod ol ' t ime. In this case, improvedunderstandins of the libraries and bookmarkets in a ihird-world country Ied toan innovative collection developmentstrategy.
r Afprox.150p.r 1996 r
r Approx.420p. r 1996 r
iii11 Americon LibroryAssoriotionfiil Book 0rder fulfillment
liit 155 ll. Wocker Orive . 0rkogq lt 60606iit;ii
/67
Selecting Microfilm for DigitolPreservolion: A Cqse Studyfrom Project Open Book
Poul Conwoy
acces.s to the re.sulting collection of digital{iles (Waters 1991; fuaters and Weiver
to maximize the quality and minimize
the cost of digital conversion of micro{ilm,and, most recently, to make large andcomplex digital liles available on the In-ternet.
Selection is the central intellectualchallenge of any program that has a goalofcreating a co{pus of useful and mean-inglul digital research materials. SelectionIbr digital conversion is like a coin. Oneface is the set oftechnical constraints thatlimits the use{ulness of the technology forpreservation and access. The other face isthe set of issues relatinq to the content ofthe materials .selected Ibr conver.sion. Toignore either I'ace of the coin in the selec-tion process shortchanges our patrons.
68/ LRTS . 40(1) . Con@ay
Mypulpose is to outline the challengesYale f'aced, and that other Iibraries willf'ace, in content-oriented selection lbrdigital conversion ofbooks that have beenmicro{ilmed in the nation's Brittle BooksProgram. A complex of ideas and theoriestogether lbrms the context within whichselection f'rom a large collection ofpres-ervation microlilm must take place. Theselection process fbr Proiect Open Bookhad to involve reconciliation ol a theory ol'what ought to be done with the realities ofthe scope of the actual microfilm collec-tion. I conclude with a series of recom-mendations, ranging{rom the mundane tothe complex, {br building a meaning{uldigital library fiom previously micro-filmed materials. A fbrthcoming report onthe latest phase of Project Open Book willreview image quality, including a lull dis-cussion of technical limitations of micro-film conversion, and the costs of digitalconversion from microfilm, including rec-ommendations on controlling or reducingthose costs.
NEH BnTT" T,E BooKS PROGRAM
The point of departure fbr Project OpenBook is the ongoing {'ederal governmentprogram administered by the NationalbnJowment lbr the Humanit ies (NEH)
known as the Brittle Books Program. Thegoal ofthe program is to preserve on mi-cro{ilm three million crumbling books se-lected {rom high-quality research collec-tions (Farr 1992). In the mid 1980s, theCommission on Preseruation and Accessarrived at the {isure of three million en-dangeredvolumes through a complex andpartly arbitrary process. First, they esti-mate the total number of unique volumes
preservation process.The overall selection stratery of the
Brittle Books Program calls {br participat-ing libraries to identi{y large, significant
subiect-oriented humanities research col-I"ciionr rich with publications from thenineteenth and early twentieth centuries.Collection subject area^s run the gamut ofhumanities disciplines-art, literature,history, and social studies-across timeand gboeraphy. In most cases the collec-tions"arJ recognized by scholars and bythe library community as having extraor-dinary pait, present, and l'uturJresearchvalue- (^Gwinn and Mosher 1983). Acldi-tionally, these collections are in extremelypoo. rh"p" due to the acidic nature ofnineteenth-century Paper, continuouspoor storage conditions, and, in manyi*tes, ,l""Jde upon decade of heavy re-search use.
In a brittle books project, library pres-ervation sta{f make title-by-title selection
reside in one location (microfilm readingroom storage cabinets), while those thatwere not filmed are browseable on theshelf or in online catalogs. These trenclsreflect the commitment on the part of par-ticipating libraries to balance the needs o['loc'al scholars with the demands ol'the na-tional program (Child 1990). Most recently,preservation librarians have stepped uplheir calls lbr use-based microlilming as acomponent of the national brittle books ef'-fbrt (De Stephano 1995).
A central tenet oI'the Brittle BooksProqram is that no book shall be {ilmedtwic;. This rule is based upon the soundlogic of economics at the national level'Tf,e need to avoid duplication has givenrise to sophisticated national biblio-graphic control mec'hanisms-tlueuing inthe Research Libraries Inlbrmation Net-
LRTS o a\Q) o Notes on Operuti'ons /69
work (RLIN) and pro.spective catalogingin the OCLC Online Computer LibraryCenter, Inc.'.s database-that qive librar-ies a tool lbr declarine their intention tocreate lilm and the tiile to complete thejob at their own pace. The NEH-requiresthat a bibliographic record for the masternegative ofeach title preserved in a brittlebooks proiect be located in either RLINor OCLC, which exchange master micro-{ilm records on a regular ba-sis. At lea^stone subject heading must be included inthe record.
The accomplishments of this programto date are prolbund and the implicationsare {'ar-reaching. When the sequence ol'NEH grants awardedin 1995 are {inished,at least 700.000 brittle volumes will havebeen preserved {iom the collections ofseventy libraries throughout the nation.The present worth of this program to thetaxpayers is at least $70 million, owing tothe {'act that it costs roughly $100 today tocomplete the microlilm refbrmatting oI asingle volume. The value of this collectionwill continue to grow with time as theper-volume costs of creating it increaseand the availability of hard-copy dupli-cates decreases.
Yale University Library has been anactive participant in this program since itsinception; it has contributed about l}Vo ofthe total, some 72,000 volumes, countingthe latest project. Beyond this contribu-tion, the preservation surveys that laid thegroundwork for the program were carriedout {irst at Yale and then rerrlicated acrossthe country (Walker 1985f. Gay Walker,who built the preservation program atYale, pioneered the development of theprocessing procedures that are commonpractice today (Walker 1983). The pro-gram continues to explore ways to im-prove the e{Iiciency of large-scale preser-vation projects-especially in the newproject to preserve the content and con-text of the entire British History collectionin the Yale library.
Tnr INrBr,r,BcruAL CoNTExr oFSnrnctroN eND SUBIECT Accnss
Certilying the centrality and cooperativenature ofselection is practically a require-
ment lbr anyone who wi.shes to lbcus onthe prof'essional collection managementresponsibility of librarians and archivists.Stam (1993, p. 304), fbr instance, beginshis excellent essay on preservation by de-clarine that:
Oui essential purpose in preservation is toensure the suwival ofevidence, incompleteand selective as it may be. The problem isone ofpriorities; it requires comprehensivecoordination and cooperation among abroad range of institutions throughout a na-tion and beyond.Practical methodologies {br acting on
this responsibility, however, have eludedus. A decade ago, Atkinson (1986) pro-posed a typologlr that distinguished be-tween selection fbr near-term local needsand selection {br long-term national pur-poses. "The clientele fbr whom this mate-rial is being preserved has not yet, fbr themost part, arrived on the scene," he sug-gested (p. 347). Cox (1989) extended andupdated this typology {br use in selectingarchival collections lbr micro{ilming byempha^sizing value and use. Child (f992)provided a handy summary of the evolu-tion ofapproaches Ibr large-scale preser-vation micro{ilming projects and pointedoptimistically to the solutions expectedfrom the ongoing work of a Commissionon Preservation and Access dual task lbrceon archival selection. Even thouqh thetask lbrces were unable to provide anynew concrete guidance on setting specific,long-term selection priorities, the meth-odologr lbr assessing collections has de-veloped a grassroots popularity in a tre-mendous variety of programs nationwide(Commission 1993).
The dilTiculty of modeling the processofselection lbr preservation dogs us as wenow approach the issue ofselecting librarymaterials {br conversion to digital im-agery. There is yet precious little discus-sion of the lerge issues; what fbcus thereis tends toward reports on the nongener-alizable experiences o{ individual digitalscanning projects. In pilot projects around
70/ LRTS . 40(1) . ConuaLl
body of material lbr research use. Thisavoidance of the issue of the use and use-fulness ol' digital imaging systems fbrscholarship, research, and teaching seemsto be endemic to libraries. In the world ofbusiness and industry, where mission-ori-ented, large-scale imaging system applica-tions originated, system design, systemcontent, and system use go hand in handas a matter o{'principle. The essential cli-ent locus and the bottomJine costs ofservice to these clients lbrce this union ofcontent and {'unction-a union that is notso easily obtained in libraries and archives.
For us, therelbre, the two essential ele-ments of intelligent, subject<rriented se-lection fbr digital conversion fiom a verylarge corpus of literature are knowledgeof the scope ofthe collection'.s content andunderstariding of the value of the collec-tion (or its components) fbr scholarshipand teaching. Beyond these essentialfbcts, a mechanism must exist fbr identi-fying individual items within a broadertopical context (Riecken 1990). Atkinson(f986, p. 350) has argued that the onlypractical way to accomplish large-scale co-operative preservation is to "build the pro-gram not around subjects but rather ex-clusively around subject collections inplace." Ideally, descriptive and subjectcataloging prac'tices support these needsby I'acilitating both known-item retrievaland broad or narrow subiect analysis, in-cluding the contextual relationshipsarnong items.
B16liographic control of micro{ilm ha-sbeen a challenge fbr the library commu-nity lbr decades and there is no need torecount this history (Gwinn 1987). Guide-lines that have evolved since the rnid-1980s have codified descriptive catalogingpractices and specified the mechanismsfbr sharing catalog data (Johnson 1995;ARL f990). In these guidelines, discreteoriginal iterns are the point of departurefbr cataloging micro{ilm ma^sters. The as-surnption of all these guidelines seems tobe that access to micro{ilm is via a known-item search derived fiom informationabout the original item. Furthermore,present microfilm guidelines make littleor no recognition of the intellectual andphysical relationships within a collection
and have not specilied or resolved subjectcataloging practice.
We knowaboutthe intense needbvthescholarlv communitv {br research malterials on {iim (Gould 168S). A recentnationalsurvey of historians fbund thal only 77o oI'the entire population do not use microfilmin their work (Gordon 1992). This samepopulation of scholars also decries thelimitations on access to micro{ilm. Inade-rluate subject access is a major source ofthe continuing challenges associated withidentifying and retrieving microlilm {'orpurposes of digital conversion. Now, a^s wemove toward the creation of a full-scaledigital library created {rom a wide varietyof source documents, some critics of tra-ditional cataloging practice are beginningto suggest that we downplay full catalog-ing ofelectronic resources precisely at thepoint at which the Machine-Readable-Cataloging
(MARC) record is beginningto fulfill its potential as a universal dataexchange fbrmat (Davis 1995). This wouldbe a mistake.
II, indeed, a microreproduction is asurrogate of an original item, why shouldwe be concerned about subiect access tomir'ro{ilm collections? One answer is thatwe know that humanities scholars areguided less by sources and more by prob-lems and questions that lead them to par-ticular sources (Case f991). In their re-cent study of the nature ol "known-item"searching, Wildemuth and O'Neiil (f 995)reviewed much of the literature on accesspoints and fbund that between 33 and67Vo ol all patrons search by broad sub-ject. Yee (f 991), in an erlually comprehen-sive review, suggests it is saf'e to concludethat sub.iect searching is desired and usedby our patrons, that they would make bestuse ol a bibliographic tool that providesboth controlled vocabularv and kewvordtext searches, and that reiearchers needto have online infbrmation about broaderand narrower search terms, as well as in-fbrmation on the relationships amongthese terms. Markey'.s (1987) research onthe use ol classification as an access toolshows the power of preserving and dis-plapng conceptual relationships amongseemingly autonomous items. A concretetest of subiect-ba^sed retrieval o{'a core
topical literature {'rom a large databa^sealso demonstrated how recall (accuracyand relevance) could be improved iI're-searchers had ready online acrcess to otherclosely related subject headings and accessto other parts ol the bibliographic record{br subject .searching (Lancaster l99l).
But what does the concept ol "subject"really mean in a humanities research con-text? A decade of systematic researchsheds light on this question, too. Bates,Wilde, and Sieg{ried (1993) have fbcusedon the vocabulary of humanities researchwith striking results. Building on the path-breaking work of Wiberley (1983) on his-torians' use of dictionaries and encyclope-dias, they showed that a majority ofresearchers start with broad subject con-cepts. More importantly, humanitiesscholars also typically consider individualproper names to be subjects (45Vo), aswellas geographic terms (22Vo), chronologicaleras (l6Vo) , and discipline s (2IVo). In theirsophisticated evaluation of natural-lan-guage inquiries as well as {brmal, struc-tured queries of online systems, they{bund that lully half oI'the study groupcombined general subiect terms withmore specific quali{iers. In yet anotherimportant study on what humanitiesscholars needed in the way ofabstractingservices, Tibbo (f993, p. 185) concludedthat "facets of time, place, and specilictopic are used by historians to de{ine theirsearch, classify their literatures, and or-ganize college curricula."
Together, these and many related stud-ies of search and retrieval behavior ofscholars and students in the humanitiessuggest not onlythe importance ofsubjectacce.ss, but al.so point toward a clear.set ofsolutions that make full use of the biblio-graphic record to enhance access and sup-port individual research (Bates 1979;1989). None of the techniques identifiedwill work, however, unless rich biblioe-raphic inlbrmation exists lbr all materialsof interest to humanities reseuchers.
A C.c.sB Srupy oN Snrncrrou
It was only logical, it seems now, that Yalelooked to its large collection ofpreserva-tion microfilm a.s a possibly ideal source
LR?S . 40(1) o Notes on Operations /71
{br large-scale conversion to &gital im-agery. The material had already been se-lected {br long-term presewation throughan extensive local process, which was thenvalidated at the national level; the {ilm metthe best standards of quality; and biblio-graphic records Ibr eac'h title resided in theRLIN and OCLC tlatabases, assuring na-tional access. As the library approached se-lection lbr &gital conversion, the only ques-tions were: What subiects were filmed andwhich subiects should be converted?
It is rluite simple to paint an overallpic'ture ol our {ilming actMty. In a nut-shell, over the past ten years, Yale pre-served on microfilm roughly li{ieen thou-sand volumes fiom the American HistoryCollection ( 1983-93), twenty-three thou-sand volumes fiom the European HistoryCollection (1988-93), and nineteen thou-sand volumes liom the History of Eco-nomics and Political Science Collection(f992-95). The Yale presewation surveyteam identiJied eac'h of these collection.sas a top preservation priority. At one time,the collections were ordered on the shell'accordins to the "Old Yale" classilicationsystem. the classilication system has arich subject orientation and provides lbrsubclassi{ication by geography, historicalera, and genre (Hitchcock 1953).
The selection theory was straightlbr-ward and emrrhasized content cohesionover the technical limitations of the digitalimaging system. It called fbr staff to iden-ti{y signi{icant "Old Yale" subject clusterso{'{ilm fiorn each of the three maior col-lections of interest to Yale's laculty andstudents in the humanities. By connectingselection with expected use, a knownpopulation ol scholars could help evaluatethe end nroduct and its uselulness fbrscholarship. Quality control proceduresworked out in earlier phases ofthe project(Conway and Weaver 1994) would requirebenchmark comparisons of digital scans{'rom a sample of the original books (whenavailable) with scans lrom the microlilmreproduction. Bibliographic records ltlrthe imase version of'the books would beadded t6 our online cataloq, Orbis, wherethey would be fully integrited with otherversions of the same title and, more im-portantly, retrievable by .sc'holars working
72/ LRTS . 40(1) . ConuaLl
on related or similar materials {br a varietyofresearch topics.
In the interests of proiect ef{iciencyand productivity, the production plancalled {br converting all of the titles onentire reels of {ilm within a given "OldYale" subject cluster. An expliJtt decisionwas made not to "de-select" a particulartitle from a chosen subject cluster simplybecause it could not be converted easilywith the erluipment conliguration in-stalled at Yale. We were curious to dis-cover the lrerluency and nature o{ "prob-lem" books and wanted to measure theimpact of these books on the conversionprocess. Challenges to implementing ourplan f'ell into two broad categories: con-tent-related issues and bibliographic con-trol issues.
CourBNr Issurs
Given the national mandate to avoid du-plication, Yale dld not film any volume inits collection that already had been pre-served on lilm at anothei institution.^Hitrates lbr "fbund film" varied within thesecollections from 3Vo to over 507o. Notsurprisingly, heavily used portions of a col-lection tend to have the hitrhest rates ofpreservation film. Beyond the tbund lilm
irroblem is the f'act that many volumes ina collection were not filmed because theyI'ell out ofthe date scope ofthe project orare modern reprints or have a lot of colorcontent.
One partial solution to the lbund lilmchallense could be to obtain {ilm titles Ibrimage cirnversion. The two options, inter-library loan and direct purchase, requirea signilicant investment of time andmoney and yield mixed results. Using"Other People'.s Film" takes all of the in-tellectual energy invested in refbrmattingthe volume in the {irst place: searching {brthe existing {ilm, matching records andthen content, concerns about quality andcompleteness, and the reluctanie o{'.somelibraries to loan {ilm containing multipletitles on varying topics. More significantly,the most efl'ective conversion of micro-Iilm is obtained liom duplicate negatives,which f'ew libraries and archives are will-ing to loan.
Through most of Yale's projects, reelprogramming has been le{t to the vendor.Reel programming is the process ofgrouping volumes with similar charac-teristics, such as size and paper tone, on areel of {ilm that will contain about onethousand frames (a^s many a-s two thou-sand book pages). The admirable goals ofmost reel programming activity, rein-forced by guidelines provided in the RLGPresert:tttion Microfilming Hunrhook(Elkington 1992), are to minimize filmwastage, Iill fiames consistently, and im-prove the consistency o{ the film densityacross the reel. Even when programmingis handled in-house, meaningful arrange-ment by topic is usually not a goal, and theresult is intellectual chaos {rom reel toreel. Volumes on many difl'erent topicscan and do appear on any given roll inthe materials selected {br Project OpenBook.
In table I I summarize the scope of thefbur major brittle books micro{ilmingprojects at Yale in the past decade anddescribe the distribution ol the nreservedtitles by topic on project reels. In only oneproject (French History) do a majority ofthe reels contain books on a single topic.The American History pro.jects show thegreatest dispersion of books by topic,owing in large measure to the long dura-tion ofthe program and the evolution oI'processing procedures during the pastdecade.
For some key collections in a singlelibrary most of the brittle books are nowgone. As a pioneer in the nation'.s preser-vation microfilming program, Yale'.s pro-cedures fbr handling the original bookhave evolved in the past decade. The dis-card rate fbr books filmed in certain areasof the European History Collection ex-ceeds 807o. The rate is partly a {'actor oIthe physical condition ofthe item selected{br microlilming andpartly determined bythe overall approach taken by the bibliog-rapher or curator responsible {br preser-vation decision making on the collections.When lilmed books are discarded, whilethe content is preserved, our ability t<rundertake quality benchmarking or tocalibrate the accuracy of the scanningequipment is severely hampered. This
LRTS e a\Q) o Notes on Operations /75
TABLE I
Y,c,La Ulrrvenstry Lrnneny Mrcnol'tt trltr.rc PRoIECTS
Total volume.s lilmed
Average volumes per reel
Total titles filmed (est )
Average titles per reel
Total number of reels
Topical tlistdbution of titles on reels
All Udes on a single topic (Zo)
Majority of titles on a topic (Vo)
Too mixed to classi{y (Zo)
15,012
7.2
11,548
D.t)
2,062
20
36
46
19,645
D . v
15,148
4.5
3,366
l0
I J
ID
3,027
4.8
2,258
3.6
638
60
29
I1
r9,000
7.8
14,600
7.2
2,028
T2
44
42
calibration becomes necessary when. Ibrwhatever reason, the reduction ratio olthe filmed volume is not known or seemsto be inaccurately recorded. In such situ-ations. the only recourse in setting up thescanning erluipment accurately is to meas_ure the original volume, which is, o{'course, impossible if the original volumeis in a landlill.
The encl result ol'these four proce-dural matters associated with routine brit-tle books filming projects is a film collec-tion at Yale with Iittle intellectual cohesionand a devastated book collection lackinqboth context and comprehensivenesiPo.ssibilitie.s Ibr brow.sing intl the integrityof'the original collection are lost.
Four clusters of titles in the "Old yale"classification .sy.stem were identi{ied thatcontained a critical mass of microlilmedtitles {rom the original collection and thatwere oI intere.st io Yale I'aculty and stu-dents. These fbur clusters are:
'
o Civil War Historyo Native American History. History of Spain Befbreihe Civil War. History of Communism, Socialism,
and FascismThese clusters were chosen {bllowing
a significant eflbrt to reconstruct the in-tellectual structure of the original bookcollection and then identi{y iubstantial"Old Yale" subclassification"- concentratedon microfilm reels with little or no extra-neous materierl Yale library bibliography
Brntrocnerurc CoNTRoL
The process by which the project staffactually fbund the items in these subiectclusters, however, raises the issue of 6ib-liographic control of micro{ilm collec-
Yale'.s earlie.st pre.servation rnicrofilm -ing projects made use ofstudent assistantsto undertake minimum conversion of his-toric c-ard files. If:ro subject tracings ap-peared on the card, none-were addel andno authority control was undertaken on
tionally, a single sub ject heading, whethercontrolled oiunc.,nirolled, is biiely sulii-cient to provide the kind and level of sub-
74/ LRTS . 40(1) . Conuau
ject access expected by todals researchpatrons.'
When the "Old Yale" call number lbrthe original book is included in the bibli-ocraphic record, it is located in an un-,tJ"r"hubl, local notes lield (939). Eachversion of the micro{ilm itself is given oneof three possible "dummy" numbers thathas no inlellectual value, unlike the origi-nal cla-ssi{ication system {br the brittle ma-terials
Without a separate, known-item search,there is no straishtfbruard mechanism ineither RLIN or-Orbis to determine fromthe microlilm record whether the originalbook was retumed to the shell'followingtilming. This l'act makes it quite challeng-ing to reconstruc't the structure oI theorieinal collection without recourse to thehisforic shelflist. which has not been com-oletelv converted to machine-readableibrm'and no longer contains cards foritems withdrawn lrom the collection {bl-lowing filming. For better or fbr worse,the sh;ltlist remains for us, alongwith the
age conversion) that was not initially envi-sioned are emblematic of the issues thatother libraries surely face. At a minimum,it is fair to assume that the library proce-dures {bllowed over the years have re-sulted in extraordinary inconsistencies incataloging practice that, Ibr all intents andpu.poJ.t, make the corpus of preserva-iion microtilm in this country all but un-retrievable by subject. This la^st statementis only the latest in a hall-century string ofcomplaints about the bibliographic con-trol of microlilm (Gwinn 1987).
REcoMMENDATToNS To IMPRovESun;rcr AccBss ATTHE Locer
INsrrrurroN
Librarians engaged in comprehensivepreservation micro{ilming projects can
is preserved and at least minimally retriev-
able by topical concepts.t. Undertake broad and comprehensive
sublect cataloging of mic'rolilm mas-teri using *t *any tields ol'the US-MARC record as are aPProPriate tocapture rich inlbrmation about eachitem',s content in terms of time, space'and topic. Multiple controlled sub-ject teims, incluJing broad and nar-row related terms, are a must.
2. Record format inlbrmation in fullysearchable fields in the local catalog,as well as in national bibliographicutilities.
3. Record standardized infbrmation on
brittle books Proiects in a -fullYsearchable lield. The unique identi-Iier assigned by NEH to the Projectmight be an apProPriate Place to
oegrn.4. Reiord infbrmation about the exist-
ence ofmicrolilm ofbooks created byother research libraries in a lullysearchable field in the local catalog.This is the present practice at Har-varcl Univeriity Library lbr all grant-lunded proiects.
5 .Record- ident i l y ing in lb rmat ionabout the existence-of the originalitem in the bibliographic record fbr
the microfilm, if the book was re-tunned to the shelf a{ter preservationprocessinq.
6. i'rogram Jntire reels ol'microfiilm bynariowlv del ined topic, to improvethe posiibilities lbr Lrowsittg of themiciotilm collection.
With comprehensive bibliographiccontrol and creative reel programming, a
local collection ol' microfilmetl books
could be made as readily accessible and as
amenable to browsing as a collection of
books. These recommendations (a^s well
a^s some {brthcoming ones relating to the
technical characteristics of presewationIilm) ought to become-standard preserva-tion processing Procedures.
LRTS o )Q) o Notes on Operations /75
RncouunNoarroNs FoR BuTLDINGTHE DrcrrAL Lrnneny wrrn
MTcRoFILM
responsibility that transcends the collec-tion development and preservaUon poli-cies ol'any o1'the libraries that have par-ticipated in the Brittle Books Program todate. Here is a set of recommendations lbrmaking broad, subiect-oriented selectionsfrom cme virtual library to create another.
1. Approach the selection process as a dis-cipline-based, multi-institution, multi-fbrmat collection development pro-gram (Hazen 1995).
2. Identilythe core literature in the tar-get discipJine using techniques usedat Cornell University in the ongoingagricultural literature project'lDefmas 1994).
3. Use the core literature as the seed fbr"growing the pearl," which is f'armore extensive than the core and f'armore varied than published sourceson paper or lilm (Bates 1979).It is important to emphasize that nei-
ther a core collection in-electronic lbrm
lection concept and the value validationthat patterns ol'patron use provide. The
criterion {br initially enlarging the digitalcollection around' the JorJ hteratreshould be recent use of either a micro-filmed book in one library or the paperoriginal in another library, as determinedby circulation, reliling, and loan statisticsirom participating institutions. The crite-
ing a digital library {iom micro{ilm o{'the
strategy is a richer understanding of theuse of research materials than we haveknown in the past. And yet this under-standing is absolutely essential becausewithout f'actoring our patrons into the de-cision-making process, the risk o{'{'ailureis simply too high. The approach is pres-ent-tense oriented but recoqnizes thatdigital preservation involves nearly con-tinual reapprai.sal of the value of the elec-tronic collection (Conway 1994). The bot-tom line lbr all ol'us, ho-ever, mav wellbe that, without improvements in iniellec-tual access to miciofilm collections that
everyone involved in pre.seruation micro-lilming and the cligitai conversion ol thatIilm. Other lindings from Proiect OnenBook demonstrate ihe extraordinary qual-ity of digital imagery that can be achievedby converting second-generation micro-
76/ LRTS . 40(1) ' ConutY
{ilm. This conclusion reallirms the gen-
{ilm {br both preservation and access. This
is a liberating notion {br the digital library
we are just beginning to build and should
allow us now to concentrate our energies
on preserving this new "viftual" library,
coniident tha'[ microlilm could serve as a
viable backup source.
WoRKs CITED
Association ofResearch Librarie s. 1990 Guidz-
lines for bl.bll,ographic records for presetDa'tion mi.crofonn nulsters Washington, D.C. :
Association of Research Libraries.
Atkinson, Ross. 1986 Selection lbr preserva-tion: A materialistic approach. Library re'
sources U technical seraiaes 30: 341-53.
Bates, Marcia J. 1979. Information search tac-
Lics. lou,rnal of the American Society forlnformntion Science 3ll'. 2{\5-14.
1989. Rethinking subject catalogingirr tlre online etlvironment Librury re-
sources lt technical sensice.s 33: 400-12.
Bates, Marcia J., Deborah N. Wilde, and
Susan Siegliied. f993. An analysis of
search terminology used by humanitiesscholars: The Getty online searching proj-
ect report numb er |. Libranl qttarterlg 63:
1-39.Case. Donald Owen. 1991. The collection and
use of infbrmation by some American his-
torians: A study of motives and methods.
Libranl quarterlY 61: 61-82.
Child, Margaret. 1990. Selection fbr micro-
lilming.Ame rican archioist 53: 250-55.
Ib92. Seleotion {br preservation. In
Acloances in pieserr:ation-antl acoess. Yol
l. Ed. Barbra Buckner Higginbotham and
Mary E. Jackson. Westport, Conn.: Meck-
ler, 147-58.Commission on Preservation and Access.
1993. Preseroation of archioal mnterials: A
renort of the task firces on archioal selec-tiin to'the Commission on Preserxationanrl Access Washington, D.C.: Commis-
sion on Preservation and Access.
Conway, Paul. 1994. Digitizing preservalion:Micro{ilm and paper go electronic. Li-
br ary j ounral ll9r 4?-45.
Conway, Faul, and Shari Weaver. 1994. The
setip phase of Project Open Book. Wash'
inqton, D.C.: Commission on Preservation
"o? Ac"".s.
Cox, Richard J. 1989. Selecting historical rec-
ords fbr hicrofilming: Some suggested
procedures fbr repositories. Library b ar'
chioal s e atrity I : 2I-4I
Davis. Stephen PauI. 1995. Digital image col-
lection-'s: Cataloging data model & nework
access. Internet document available at:
http://wwwcolumbia.edu/cMibraries/inside/p rojects/di aPlPaPer. h tml
Demas, Samuel. 1994. Setting preservation
Driorities at Mann Library: A disciplinary
ipproach. Libranl hi' tech 12, no.3: 81-88.
De Stephano, Paula. 1995 Use-based selec-
tion-{br preservation micro{ilm ing. College
b research libraries 56: 409-18.
Elhnqton, Nancy E. 1992 RLG preseroution
microfilming' handbook. Mountain View
Calif.: Researoh Libraries GrouP.
Records Commission.Gould, Ccrnstance. 1989 lnformntion needs i'n
the humanities: An assessmenrt. Stanfbrd:
Research Libraries GrouP
Gwinn. Nancy E. 1987. Preseraation micro'
filming: A'guidz for librarians and archi-
oists. Chicago: ALA.
Gwinn, Nancy E., and Paul H. Mosher. 1983'
Coordina[ing collection development:'TheRLG conspectus' CoIIege C: reseurch li-
braries 44: 128-40.
Hazen, Dan C. f995. Collection developmentpolicies in the infbrmation age. College b
,nsoarch libraries 56: 29-31.
Hitchcock, Iennette E 1953. The Yale library
classi{ication. Yule (Jni'oersi'tt1 libra'n1 ga-
zette 2]7:95-109.
Iohnson, Bruce C, ed. lgg5 Guidelines for' hibliographic tlescription of reprodttc-
tions. Chicago: ALA.
Lancaster, F. W., and others. lg9l ldentiIying
barriers to e{I'ective subject access in li-
2:tzx;I:q:i,";l;:n'r:**"esbtechni-Markey, Karen. 1987. Searching and browsing
in ihe Dewey Decimal Classi{ication in an
online catalog. C ataloging 6 classificationquarterht 7:37-68
Rlec'ken. Hlnry. 1990. The agony of clioice:
Strategies for preservation and scholar-
ship. I\ Annual report lg8g-90. Washing-ton, D.C.: Commission on Preservationand Access, 7-13,
Stam, David H. 1993. The questions of pres-ervation. ln Reseurch libraries-yester-rlaq, today, anrl tomorrou, ed. William f .Wel.slr. Westport, Conn.: CreenwoolPress, 303-18
edge Industry Publicarions, 93-113.Walker, Gay, and others. 1985. The yale .sur-
vey: A large-scale survey of book deterio-ration iri the Yale University Librarv. Col-lcge b rascurch libraries 46: I l ljd.
Waters, Dcrnald J. 1991. From microfilm todigitul imugery. Wasliington. D.C.: Com-mission on Preservation and Access.
Waters, Donald f., and Shari Weaver. lgg2.The organizuiional phase rf pnject OpenBrroft. Washington, D.C.: Comriission onPreservalion ̂ nd A""ess
Wiberley, Stephen E., fr. Ig83. Subject accessin the humanities and the preciiion of thelrumanists' vocabulary Li\ranl qua rterly53: 420-33.
Wildemuth, Barbara M , and Ann L. O'Neill1995 The "known" in known-itemsearcl res: Empir ical support ibr user-cen-tered design.'College 6'revor"h libruries56: 265-81.
Yee, Martha M. 1991. System design and cata-loging meet the user: User iriterl'aces too-nline public access catalogs. Journal ofthe Ameri.can Society for Informati.on Sci-ence 42:78-98.
LRTS o 40(1) . Notes on Operations /77
The Srur.of
the{Art
- t .
...worKrngsmart
Information Industry
lead,ers in prooid,ing
subscription seruices,articl.e deliuery & Iibraryautom,&tion s oftus ar e.
. REMO
. ROSSr Renewal Expressr Financial PlannerlUnCover
. BACKSERV
RenovoRE Acnoemrc SeRvrces700 Black Horse Pike. Ste. 207Blackwood, NJ 08012Phone: l-800-645-6595Fux: 609-227-8322
78/
Seleclion for Preservolion:A Digitol Solulion forlllustroted Texts
Jonel Gerlz
LRTS o a0Q) o Notes on Operations /79
is illegible or badly indexed, then preser-vation and acce.ss both f'ail.
Determining what is usable rests onthe -sele-ctor's an.alysis o{' research patternsin the discipline.s that use the material.s.How will the materials be used-lbr acare{ul reading of the firll text, {br quickteference consultation, to collect data, orto be examined in close combination withother items, as when an art historian com-pare.s ten.s or hundreds of images? Willuse be lrerluent or inlrequent oier time?Hear.y in the short term? Low in the longterm? Must the materials be immediatelfavailable or can scholars tolerate a slowerretrieval rate?
there aworkable re{brmattinq method fbrreplacing the item with a cJpy that carrserve the same uses as the orisinal? Howmuch ol'the inlbrmation contalned in theoriginal can be transf'erred to the copy? II'we are talking about relbrmatting via mi-crofilm, is the-item one whose coritent can
DIGITAL PRESERVATIONTpcHNor_ocy
Digital technology o{l'ers us the potentialto broaden preservation bec.ause ol itsability to en[ance access to endangeredmaterials. But at the same t ime the;al id-ity ofdigitization as a source oflong-termpreseruation is very much an open (lues-tion. We know thal digital storage mediahave a .short lif'e relative to microfilm, oreven relat ive to acid paper. We knowthat soltware an.l harclwaie chanqe withdmor-t lrightening speed, leavinf older
iterations behind and o{ten unreadable. It
security, we must ansure that we have themost permanent analog version we canachiev^e-this might be"the original itemit.sell, properly repaired and housed, or arefbrmatted version on {ilm or other sta-ble medium. Microfilm in long-term ar-chival storage can continue to .serve fbrcenturie.s. After all, longevity and stabilityare the hallmarks ot'piopeily made ani.stored lilm.
version presents an accurate record ofthe
more legible, but this changes the {'acts ofwhat the original really wa^s at the time of'scanning. Authenticity and accuracy inrepresenting the original are particularlyat issue where the original will be dis-cardecl a{ier scanning.
-
PnoouctNc VTRTUAL Corrns nnolrDrcrut VERSToNS
and, ofcourse, in case ofaccidental Ioss orchange to the digital pre.servation ver.sion.
80/ LRTS . 40(1) o Certz
Should it ever be needed or desired, wewill have the analog version to rescan.
This model, which has been called the
els of resolution and accessing mecha-
Selection decisions must be made with
preservation will work in a digital environ-
then push the technologlz in those direc-tions. As what is available on the techno-logical side continues to change, we willbroaden- the.range of materiali appropri-ate to select fbr preservation throufh digi-tization.
CAsE STUDY:Colon Ovensrzr Meps
Columbia University Libraries' Preserva-tion Division has been experimentingwith the hybrid digital approach, selectinf
Becrcno uN o, P nnsnnvel oNReroRvlrrrNG METHoDS
Traditional preservation relbrmattingmethods can lead to negative selectionwhen we decide not to'select an itembecause we have no satis{'actory preserva-tion and access method. Illustrated mate-
scholars be able to view illustrations whilethey read the accompanying text. Further,they neecl to see the illustraiion as awhole,to fbllow inlbrmation across the breadthof its surf'ace, and they must also be ableto read the linest details at every point.Color and pattern are important {itr aes-thetic reas6ns and as coding devices onmaps and charts (Commissio-n on Preser-vation and Access 1989; foint Task Forcere92).
Preserving illustrated materials is nclteasy. Oversize illustrations in brittle vol-umes sull'er particular physical stress.Publishers combine text with illustrationsby fblding over,size items into the bindtngor pockets. While the pages of the vol-umes fbllow the usual course of slowchernical degradation, sel{'-destruction of
ture monographs, the Preserryation Di-vision {bund that 68Vo of the collectioncontains a mixture of illustrations notsuitable lbr filming; LTVo have oversizeIoldouts. Similarly, the University ofChicago Preservation Departmeni re-ports that between IOVo and 207o oftheir collections in the sciences containoversize graphic materials (PresewationDenartment 1989).
LRTS o 40(1) o Notes on Operations /81
Black-and-white micro{ilm certainly i.snot a success{ul method l'or preservingprint materials that are heavilyillustrateiwith color and oversize eleinents. Notonly is the color lost; the oversize illustra-tions must be {ilmed in sections in orderto keep them legible, and the result is amajor loss ol'f unctionality. Sectioned illus-trations are often genuinely unusable.
Even torn and crumbling original illus-trations can be prel'erable to poor repro-ductions. At Columbia, art and archiitec-ture faculty reiected micro{ilm ofillustrated oiignais. Because micro{ilm-ing did not pieserve the content of thevolumes and because hand conservationwas not I'ea.sible, selection fbr pre.serva-tion of brittle illustrated books in essencebecame selection lbr inde{inite residencein the "sick bay'' instead oI'selection torefbrmat the books and return their con-tent to scholars lbr research.
tremely {rustrated by the technical limita-tions ofpreseruation that have preventedthem _from making successful^preserva-tion decisions on these very importantconspectus level 4 and 5'coll6ctions,which would otherwise be among the {irstselected lbr pre.servation.
Mnrgooor,ocy
In 1994 Columbia undertook a projectlunded by the Commission on Preserva-
into an online whole. The goal was lbr the
"-cholar to view the text and the illu.stra-tions in juxtaposition, as was possible withthe original paper volume.
. In phase one of the proiect, we ad-
dressed the scanning of oversize color il-lustrations, specificilly maps. Capturewas equally success{ul'f'ro- ?ilm ur'l'-*the original. We also have {bund, not sur-prisingly, that Internet access and deliveryhave de{inite limits at present and thatprintouts can serve as a stopgap in theinterim. A detailed linal report of theproject and over three hunilred digitalimages can be acce.s.sed over the Internetgt hyp:/ / www.cc.columbia.edu/imaging/htmVlargemaps/.
Moving through lilm to digital was ourpref'erred option fbr a number of reasons.For instance, several ofthe vendors work-ing on the project pre{'er scanning a lilmintermediary rather than the original,claiming that they can achieve a betterscan {rom the lilm version. In nracticalterms, when the original is very {ragile,handling needs to b"e minimized. M"anyscanners cannot accommodate oversize
During the project we worked withlive turn-of'-the-century brittle maps lromthe Nero York Stute Museum hilleiin. We
tion and Acces-s pro ject, whic.h proved thatsuch microliche cbuld succeislully cap-ture andpreserve an oversize illustration'.scontent in fine detail at a low reductionratio (Klimley 1993).
produced by scanning the microfiche andin the versions made by scanning the origi-
82/ LRTS . 40(1) o Gertz
nal maps. When scanned at apixel depth o{24-bit color. a resolution level of 200 dotspel inch (dpi) on the original map producedlull leglbility of the smallest type.
WJ are used to hearing that 600 dpi isneeded fbr preservation, but that is in thecontext of black-and- white (binary) scan-ning. The use of24-bit color adds a greatdeal of visual in{brmation to the image.Higher pixel depth (that is, use of gray,"oi" nr i,,lor rather than black ancl wliite)allows use of lower resolution, so that 200dpi in 24-bit color gives legibility approxi-mately equivalent to 600 dpi binary (Ester
1991). What this means lbr oversize im-ages is that a map twenty inches acrosslJ,luires 4,000 dot's (20 tnihes x 200 dots)acirss its surl'ace in order to reproducethe linest one millimeter print legibly inlull color. The micro{iche of that same
{bur inches at 1,000 dpi when scanningthe microliche in order to reach 4,000dots across the map surf'ace.
While achieving legibility was quitesuccessful during the proiect, questionsremain about the quahty of the color thatcan be delivered to the viewer. We cancapture color with 24 bits of inlbrmationpe? dot, which translates to a potential Iirrsixteen rnillion diflbrent hues. Capturecan be very accurate ifscanners are care-f'ully calibrated using standard colorcharts, but it is also true that certain scan-ners are biased toward certain colorranges, just as some {ilms are "cooler" intone and others are "warmer."
Monitors normally dlsplay only 256colors. No two printers or monitors can beguaranteerl trr output exactly the sameihrdes unless thev have also been care-f ully calibrated. ell ol'this means that thecolor we see online is not terribly true tothe original maps. Howevcr, in the case ofmaps,
"color is primarily used lbr coding,
so that most scholars are satislied as longas all the codes remain distinct and thecolor approximates the original. Butscholars who need {ull color accuracy (1or
instance, art historians) might well find
digital copies less than satis{actory. Thedegree to which the color ol'the lilm in-termediary does or does not match thepaper original is also relevant.
CoNcr,usroNs
Our conclusions, then, hold only fbr gen-
or historical artif'acts with many subtlecolor tones, and where important infbr-mation content may be contained in theverv libers ofthe paper.'Capture
is one side of the coin, deliv-ery is ihe other. We can currently capturemore inlbrmation than c'an readily betransmitted or displayed on an averagemonitor. The liles of the scanned maps athigh resolution and 24-bit color can run aslar'fe as twenty megabytes when uncom-pte"ssed. whaf colJmbia has mounted onitr W"b site Ibr Internet access are losslessGIF versions of the files with 256 colorsand lossy JPEG versions with 16 millioncolors. The resolution is cut back to aboutf50 dpi. These liles run,uP to about sixmegaSytes. Unfbrtunately. these lower-resJl,ttion files that are more easily trans-
microfilm of the text of fbur volumes ofthe Museum Bulleti'n at 600 dpi in blackand white, :rnd will scan single-fiamecolor microflche of the illustrations in 24-
bit color at 200 dpi. This will produce aseries of digital files, one for each pageand one {or each illustration. We will useindexing and document structure sofi-ware to integrate the files of pages andillustrations so that users can move easilyfrom one to another online. The result willbe the {ull preservation of the lbur samplevolumes. Long-lasting microfilm and m!cro{iche will be created lbr all the text andillustrations, along with a digital versionthat maintains the author'.s juxtapositionof words and illustration.s online. andthrough paper printouts.
Obviously, many questions remain. Towhat extent will the existence of thesedigital images satis{y the scholarly com-munityk needs? Will they afl'ect howscholars do their research? What role willthey play fbr scholars interested in de-tailed analysis of the maps? Will they serveas pointers to the originals that must thenbe consulted, or to requests lbr printouts,or will some scholars be able to do theirwork with the digital images alone? Willthe quality of the color images be satis{'ac-tory? Will a bit-mapped version of the textsu{lice?
Finally, what does all of this mean fbrselection {br preservation? lt appears too{Ter potential {br a new option {br selec-tor.s l'aced with trying to preserue one verydlllicult class of materials. And it oll'ersone criterion to justi{y selecting digitiza-tion as a presewation method: to employ
LRTS o 0(1) o Notes on ()perotions /83
digital imaging on the grounds that a digi-
tal version can solve preservation prob-lems that cannot be handled through ana-log rneans. Digitization broadens our
ability to capture in{brmation lrom a
widei range oT media, so that more pres-ervation decisions can be made ba^sed on
the condition and content ofthe item in-stead of on the limited ranse of traditional
technical options lbr preservation.
Wonxs Cnno
Commission on Preservation and Access.1989. Scholarly resou.rces in art history:Issues i'n preseraati.on Report of the Serni-nar, Spring Hill, Wayzata, Minnes ota, S ep-temher 29-October 1, 7988. Washington,D C.: Commission on Preservat ion andAccess
Ester, Michael. 1991 Image quality andviewer perception Yivtal resources 7, no.4: 51-63
Joint Task Force on Text and Image. 1992Preseroing the ilhtstratetl tatt. Washing-ton, D C.: Commission on Preservationand Access.
Klimley, Susan. 1993. Notes liom the cuttingedge. Microform reoi.eu 22: IO5-7.
Preservation Department. 1989 Report on thecondition of the collections. Chicago: University of Chicago Library.
Willis, Don. 1992. A hybrid systems approachto presen)ation of printetlmderials Wash-ington, D.C : Commission on Preseruationand Access.
Ergonomics Progroms ondAclivilies in Reseqrch Librories
Suson Cook Summer
AAn epitlernic ol'work-relatetl hand andarm injuries in computer users has pro-pelled the lield o{ ergonomics onto centerstage. The increasing number of muscu-loskeletal injuries suIl'ered stems primar-ily fiom vast increases in computer use ino{Iices, schools, and homes, where peopleperfbrm thousands o{ repetitive motionslbr hours at a stretch, o{ten sitting at batllyarranged workstations. Other people havebeen plagued by back, shoulder, and neckstrains from poor materials-handlingtechniques in the lifiing and transportingofbooks, computer equipment, and heavyot'1iir'"r"
injuries aflect manytypes of of-lice workers, including journalists, tele-phone operators, data entry sta{I, word
processors, and dozens ofothers. The in-juries come in a variety of degrees, {brms,nomenclatures, and acronyms, includingseveral types of repetitive stress injuries(RSI), repetitive motion injuries, and cu-mulative trauma disorders (CTD), such astendinitis and carpal tunnel s;mdrome.While such iniuries have long been knownto musicians, f'actory work6rs, and em-ployees in the lbod industry they are nowafflicting what is currently the nation'.slargest occupational group: computer us-ers. Although most injuries can be pre-vented or caught and treated at an earlystage, others are much more serious.
This "epidemic" has raised public con-sciousness about ergonomics, the studyofhow we interact with our physical work
Awareness Committee, Michigan State University Libraries. The author also thanks VeronicaGhetie, Ollice ol Enviroumental Health and Sa{'ety. Columbia University. Manuscript receivedFebruary 9, 1995; revised and accepted Ibr publication August 4, 1995.
environment. It has spawned a largeamount of literature, training, occupa-tional therapy, n etworking, and"legislationaimed at its prevention and cure. For in-stance, the United States OccupationalSa{'ety and Health Administration
Newspapers, popular magazines, andtelevision have all given ergonomics broad
hand a}nd RSINE? Repetitioe Strain In-ju.ry Netaslet'ter.) Unions and labor rela-tions boards have organized seminars onergonomics to discuss the prevention ofRSI, the. proposed I'ederal legislation, andworl(ers' compensation.
In response to the great number ot'injuries, some hospitals have establishedclinics to treat patients sullering fiomRSI. The Miller Health Care Institute atSt. Luke'.s-Roosevelt Medical Center inNew York, established in 1985 to treatmusicians with injuries, now treats a grow-ing number o[ computer operator.s. Itsdirector, Dr. Emil Piscarelli, coauthoreda book entitled Repetitioe Strain Injury:A Computer User's Guiclp (Pascarelli and
LRTS o 40(1) o Notes on Operations /85
Quilter 1994), which of'fers a seven-pointprogram lbr the prevention and treatmentof RSI.
Computer supplies and product designlikewise reflect the increased concernwith ergonomic.s. In addition to adjustableollice chairs and computer tables, equip-ment catalog.s now include a large a.s.sort-ment ofwrist rests, antiglare screens, tele-phone headsets, fbot rests, and online
irrogr^ms that periodically remind usersto re{bcus their eyes, exercise, or take aquick stretch break. One examole i.s Exer-ciseBreak, a program of pop-rip windowswith stretch and relaxation exercises.
Keyboard design is under new scrutinyas companies experimentwith models de-signed to encourage typing with handsand wrists in a more neutral nosition. re-cluce overuse of the right hatril, *,1
"h*-nel some keying away {iom the weakest{ingers. This includes a whole slew of "er-gonomic" keyboards {'eaturing variationson conventional key arrangement, tilt, orthe shape and contour of the keyboarditself. Apple Computer was the first todevelop a keyboard that splits into twopieces. Microso{t introduced the "NaturalKeyboard," and many other companieshave likewise experimented in this area(Manes 1994). Advertising has adoptedergonomics as a catchword, using it indescriptions of not only ollice equipment,but of car and airplane seats, cameras,scissors, and manv other tools used inworkshops, kitche;s, and gardens.
Concern.s about ergonomics have en-gendered abrand new area of{itness, witha wealth of publications, videos, and on-line programs devoted to well-being at theollice. These include exercise routines fbrthe hand.s and arms, eye exerci.se.s, andguidelines lbr seated and standing pos-ture. For example, Eyercize is a so{'twareprogram that interrupts the operator atperiodic intervals and leads eye exercises.Articles on ergonomics report handouts,training, and exercise programs sproutingup in settings as diverse a-s the ollices ofMicrosolt, Lawrence Livermore NationalLaboratory, the clothing manul'acturerOshKosh'B'Gosh, and iSG/Sky Chefs,the airline caterer (Ubols 1992; Fet'er1994).
86/ LRTS . 40(1) o Surnmer
INcnnesno AwARENESS oFEncouourcs tN Lrnnenrrs
Libraries have become increasingly auto-mated durinc the last decade. In ad&tionto building and maintaining online cata-
logs, stall'members in circulation, rel'er-eice, collection development, bindingpreparation, serials control, interlibraryiouti, p"t*onnel, and administration are allspeniling more time at their comPuterkeyboards. In addition, nearly all relatedtaiks are likewise computer-dependent:word processing lbr correspondence, re-ports,'memt,s, ittd pto""drral documen-lation; statistics compilation; electronicmail; and use ofthe Internet lbr dozens ofapplications. Increasing numbers of news-letiers and iournals are als<.r changing toonline {brmats. And, the movement in li-braries away from the card catalog, thetypewriter, and p"p"t liles has g.eat-ly de-J"Lar",l tormerly Luilt-in physlcal atti"i-ties like rolling in typewrifeipaper, pull-ing out catalbg drawers. and walkingacioss the ollice to consult manual filesIn short. in manv institutions streamlinedworkllows combined with reduced stalfhave resulted in st#f members being in-creasingly tied to their computers withless olfline work to mix into their dailyroutines.
This new environment has resulted inan increase in RSIs and in a growingawareness of ergonomic issues in libraries.There is now a rich literature on ergonom-ics and libraries in monographs, journalarticles, and electronic resources. Themaiority of these rrublications fbcus onergon.-,mically sound principles ol work-statiOn arrangement, posture, and worKhabits. Others discuss ergonomics as anaspect ol' library managemerrt, includingits relation to automation, organizationalchange, space planning, equipment budg-ets, and rrersonnel issues. While manyauthors a-r"
"ottcem"d with computer-
dependent technical services depart-mdnts, more attention is being given toref'erence and circulation service points,as well as to patron workstations.
Ergonomics ha^s also been discussed ina number o{'postings on the AUTOCAT
discussion list, where librarians have re-ported recent increases in carpal tunneliniuries and stalT members out {br surgeryoi on &sability. Some postings have men-
tioned the establishment of sta{f trainingin ergonomics and the purchase of'adjust-able lurniture and computer accessoriessuch as wrist rests. Othels have discussed
is based on courses given by the |oyceInstitute, a Seattle-based lirm specializingin ergonomics. ln 199I and 1992 this in-cludei the institute'.s "Datahealth Ergo-
nomics Seminars" and "Practical O{fice
Ergonomics," attended by several hun-
drJd neorrle, as well as the certification oI'
u nuilb". of LC staft' members as key
trainers. In 1991 LC's Collections Serv-ices Visual Display Terminal (VDT) Ergo-
nomics Committe" produced a laminaieclhandout called "Ergonomics and VDTUse," which was distributed to LC stafl,
with another 7,500 copies later sent to
more than five hundred libraries around
the country. The broadside was reissuedin 1992. Many libraries distributed copies
or based local ergonomics handouts on
cal Services LITA Serials AutomationInterest Group at the ALA Midwinter
LRTS o 40(1) o Notes on Operations /87
awal'enes.s of ergonomic.s and RSI, train-ing programs, the purchase ol'lully adjust-able lirrniture, and the provision'of com-puter acces.sories including fbot rests,antiglare screens, and wrist iests. The lall1994 NOTIS Users' Group Meeting(N UGM) al.so fbatured a sessibn on ers6lnomics. Attendees received copies of lheLC ergonomics handout, a ch-eckhst fbrposture and work habits, recomrnendedexerc.ises,.a bibliography, and in li rrmationon related electronic resources.
EARLTER Sunvpy
published their results in a l9g2 issue of
noncomputer tasks listed in the surveyreturns included ofl'-terminal editinq andcataloging, shel{lisVcard catalog mainte-nance, processing activities, Iiling/revi-sion,-and authority work. Steinhage-n andMueller also lbund that ergonomic furni-ture (other than ad.iustable chairs) andaccessories were not widely used in theIibraries surveyed. The most commonitem.s.reported were pneumatically ad-justable chairs (502o)-, window blinds(42Vo), and antiglare screens (4lTo). Re-spoT-e: _ abo-u!
*w-hat the respondents
would like if {unding w"t" a.'uil^bl" irr-
cluded {irlly ergonomic workstations(79Vo) and computers at individual desks(637o).
SUMMARYoF REsULTSOF THIS SUNVEY
The pre.sent survey wa'i de.signed to asse.s.sthe current state of ergonomics programsand activities in research librariei in iermsoffhctors including: (1) whether librariesare establishing fdmal ergonomics com-mittees or programs; (2) whether librariesare. buying much ergonomics erluipmentand accessories; (3) how much librariesare incorporating ergonomics concernsinto the design or renovation ol' ol'ficesand departments; (4) what libraries are
have raised questions and concerns aboutergonomics; and (8) where innovative or"model" programs are in place.
A rluestionnaire was sent to 104 headsof technical services at ARL libraries. and
ans had established lbrmal erconomicscommittees or programs and, il-so, whatcategories and levels of stall'were in-volvetl Seventeen reported they hadlormed ergonomics committees or pro-grams, while thirty-seven had not. A num-Fer of're"^pondenis noted that their com-mittees were {brmed during the past threeyears, while others said they were activelyplanning to appoint such a group be.auseol the increasinq need and concern lbrergonomics. Committee members pri-marily include prol'e.ssional librarians indparaprofessional sta1f, with some also re-
88/ LR?S . 40(1) . Sunxnxer
provides workstation evaluation, cost esti-mates lbr upgrade and design, trainingprograms and literature, and eye exami{br computer users.
These committees' major areas of ac-tivity are workstation design, training pro-grams, and literature distribution. Twocompleted questionnaires listed conduct-ing exercise sessions, while three listedactivities like acquiring ergonomic acces-sories and publishing Tistiol' recommen-dations. Not a single committee or pro-gram reported limiting its activitiei totechnical services units.
marked increase over the lindings bySteinhagen and Mueller (1992).
Adjustable chairs topped the list, with{ilty-two libraries (96%i reportirrg. Thiswas fbllowed by wrists rests (50 libraries,or 93Vo), antigliue screens and documentholders (49 libraries, or glVo each), footrests (44 libraries, or SlVo), adiustable ta-bles orworkstations (39 libraries, or 72Vo),and acoustic printer pads or covers (22libraries, or 4iEo). Other items listed in-cluded humicliliers or dehumitlifiers, ad-justable rnonitor arms, split keyboards,keyboard/mouse trays, meihanical li{tingdevices, sorting stools, and back supportifbr sta{f who do shelvins.
In response to whether such itemswere available for all stalf or only whenrerluested, twenty-two respondents
checked "{br all sta{I," while {brty-threechecked "only when requested." This sec-tion elicited numerous comments, manyof which were common to several librai-
ers reported that adjustable {urniture andergonomic equipment and accessorieswere being introduced on a gradual orpiecemeal ba-sis, often tied into oflicerenovations, the introduction of newequipment, or annual equipment budg-ets. Some respondents said that smallitems (e.g., antiglare screens, wrist rests,and {bot rests) were available throughoutthe year, with larger purchases (fumi"ture)purchased annually. One respondentmentioned that even when stalf have ad-justable chairs and workstations, "they sel-dom seem to take advantage of those {'ea-tures." A f'ew said thev were onlvbeginning to move in the diiection of sup-plying ergonomic erluipment and accessir-ries. Some of these reported that theirinstitution was coordinating the purchaseol'these items with the selection of inte-grated systems that will put computers oni-ll statf desks, while othirs r"port"d thatthey were hampered by budgetary con-straints.
Ergonomics concerns are being incor-porated into oflice renovation and design.For example, eighteen reported the use ofsound-absorbent llooring, walls, and ceil-ing tiles. Fourteen reported the use ofrecessed lightlng, eleven reported usingnonreflective paint, nine reported tintedwindow glass, and three listed other items,such as reduced lighting.
While only seventeen reported fbrmalergonomics committees or programs, er-gonomics education and training have be-come widespread. Thirty-two distributehandouts or articles, thirty<rne ofI'erseminars or workshops {br computer us-ers, twenty-fbur listed workstation evalu-ations, nineteen o{I'er seminars or work-shops to avoid lbwer-back injuries, andthirteen show training videos. A f'ew ofi'ereye exalns Ibr computer users, exercise
LRTS o 40(1) . Notes on Operati.ons /8g
ported that union negotiations have in-cluded concern.s or stipulation.s about er-gonomics or ergonomic erluipment, whilethirty repofted that they hive not. A num-ber of re.spondents noted that unions arecurrently pursuing issues related to ergo-nomics. While many have not incorno-rated ergonomic.s into iob descriptiJns,there is clearly a trend to take such ihctors
Sour MooBL PRocRAMS
In addition to providing an overall pictureot ergonomics activities in libraries, the)-urvey res-ults-along with the literatureantl handouts some respondents en-closed-also identified a f'6w institutionswith extremely active, broad, and innova-t ive programs. Some brief examplesfbllow.
CoroRepo SrATE UNrvunsrryLtsRAnrns
"standard I'eature.s," such as conductingergonomic evaluations fbr all sta{f mem--
tie.s are available both to paraprof'essionalstafT (who spend approximalely 447o oftheir time at computers) and to pro{'es-.sional stall' (who-spend approximately287o).
The-Colorado program has also incor-porated ergonomic.s into per{brmance ap-praisals, which have a section called"Emergency, security, saf'ety and ergo-nomics." This includes evaluation in terms
90/ LRTS . 40(1) . Summer
sonnel department, supervisors, employ-ees, and building proctors.
LIBRARY oF CoNGRESS
The Libtrry of Congress Workplace Ergo-nomics Program covers all positionsthroughout the enormous LC system, in-cluding both stalf who work at computersand sta{f who perfbrm various qpes ofmaterials-handling, such as using book-trucks to transport books, manuscripts, andmotion pictures. Approximately 40Vo o[both prol'essional and paraprof'essional stalfspend more than six hours per day at thecomputer, with another 22Vo ,tsing the com-puter Ibr more than four hours per day.
The program'.s main component is"{brmal surveillance and iob analysis anddesign using tools, including survey in-struments, as specified in the 1990 OSHAdra{t fbr an ergonomics program" (Mans-field r99a). This includes looking lbr risk{'actors through videotaping, completingchecklists, and workflow analysis. Thecommittee works with the Of1ice ofHealth and Saf'ety, the Facility Design andConstruction Oflice, and the St#TTrain-ing and Development Ollice. In additionto many "standard" ergonomics accesso-ries (e.g., adjustable furniture, antiglarescreens, wrist rests and {bot rests, etc.),stalf members receive, as needed, bookholders and mechanical li{tine devices todeal with the more than thirty-one thousanditems received daily. The cnmmittee issueda poster series on proper VDT work habits,a broadside on VDT exercises, and the na-tionally distributed broadside on properVDT workstation conligr.rration. The arti-cles posted on MARVEL give additionalinfbnnation about this large program.
COLUMBTA UNtvensrtv LTBRARIES
Columbia's program began in early 1992with a six-member Glare Screen TaskForce, appointed to evaluate and selectantiglare screens {br technical services de-partments when a major work{low reor-ganization was putting computers onevery desk for the lirst time. The work ofthe task {brce identi{ied many relatedrluestions, leading to the appointment of
a permanent group with a broader lbcus.The group now includes a six-membercommittee working with a group of "coor-
dinators," representing a total of twenty-two library units or departments. Thegroup works very closely with the Olliceol'Environmental Health and Sal'ety andhas develop_ed a multif'aceted program oftraining ancl activities.
The Environmental Health and SafetyOflice provides expertise in the {brm of:(1) periodic workshops and extensivehandouts on working sal'ely with VDTsand on avoiding krwer-back injuries in ma-terials handling; (2) personal audits ofin-dividual workstations and the trainins ofcommittee members and coordinator--s toconduct such audits; (3) the loan oftrain-ing videos; and (4) special problem reso-lution as needed, such as measuring lightlevels and evaluating the materials-han-dling techniques of statT who do largeamounts of lifting or reshelving.
The committee and coordinators serveas "local experts" or resource people intheir units. Their responsibilities include:(1) maintaining and distributing articlesand handouts. manv ofwhich have beencompiled into standardized "Ergonomics
Literature Notebooks"; (2) perfbrmingworkstation reviews, including the recom-mendation of accessories'such as wristrests, {bot rests, task lamps, copy stands,and antiglare screens, as needed; (3) test-ing andlvaluating new equipment andaccessories; (4) sewing as liaisons to thecommittee chair and the O{lice of Envi-ronmental Health and Safety to help iden-ti{y problems and develop solutions; and(5) planning training events.
The confisuration of the committeeand coordinat*ors and their ties to the En-vironmental Health and Sa{'ety Ollicehave spread ergonomics awareness andtraining throughout the libraries and havecreated a {ramework lbr broad and sys-tematic staff orientation, training, andproblem resolution.
Mrcgrce,N Srare UNtvnnsrrv
A particularly active and comprehensivep.igtr* is sponsored by the ErgonomicsAwareness Committee of Michigan State
LRTS o 40(1) o Notes on Operations /91
University Libraries. Known as the "Er-gobusters," this group includes adminis-trators, prof'es sional sta{I, and parapro{'es-.sional.s. They assi.st both prot'es.sional .stafflwhct spend varying amounts of time at thecornpu-ter, and paraprof'essional stal'l, who.spend between75Vo and 80Vo ol'theirtime
Responsibility_ builds on this, particularlyemphasizing the importanc" ,JI stafl'm,i-rale and satety. The Z.ommitteels work hasresulted in a signi{icant drop in workers'compensation claims and a boost in mo-rale.
A majorcomponent of the committee'.sactivity involves workstation evaluation,
cornpare and contrast sixteen points aboutthlee di{I'erent chair modeli; and (3) afbur-page worksite evaluation form withsections on chairs and seating, keyboardsand arm positioning, VDTsI commentsmade botf, belbre a.-nd alier evaluation.sand corrective actions, and sections lbrboth individual and shared workstations.They al.so put together a number of hand-outs, workstation checklists, recom-m_ended exercises, and bibliographies.The Ergobu.sters are authorized-tobrderinexpensive items (such a^s wrist rests andmonitor stands) as paft of their evalu-ations. The Erqobusters have also assistedwith irnproving the larger working envi-ronment. Theyhave, Ibrinstance, oideredpartitions to reduce noise in the technicalservices division and ordered curtains andchanges in, lighting to reduce glare in theDUSrness lrbrarv.
gonomic Awareness" .seminars in whichthey suggest yays lirr superuisors to pre-vent work-related injuries and ways su-pervisors can help injured workers returnto work.
SutuMmy aNo CoNcrustol,ls
The results of this survey indicate a grow-ing availability of ergonomics training,equipment, and accessories in researchlibraries This is true of libraries both withand without {brmal ergonornics programs.S<;me of thi.s activity ha.s been driven byincreasing numbers of work-related ergo-nomic injuries such as c.arpal tunnel syn-drome. Furthermore, .some libraries'areincolporating ergonomics concerns intojob dercriptions, union negotiations, andollice de.sign and renovation.
There iia definite increase in the num-ber of libraries establishing lbrmal ergo-nomics committees or programs, althoughthis number is still relatively small. F"orlibraries that do have such programs, thecomrnittee stnrcture and mandate haveenabled participants to organize and pro-vide standardized training in ergonomicsand materials-handling to large numbersof staff. In addition,"these iommitteespfovide a fbrum and network lbr problemidentification and resolution, as well as anollicial channel to relevant service.s in de-partments such as personnel, Iibrary sys-tems, and campus health and safety,
WoRKs CrrEDBrody, Jane. 1992. Epidemic at the computer;
Hand and arm injuries. Netu York limes,March 3, CI; March 4, C14.
Bryant, Barbara 1993 Ergonomics: LCwork-ers risk injury. Library ofCongress gazette19 Nov. In MARVEL [database online]Available {iom: gopher://marvel.loc gov/1 l/employeelrealth/ergonomics.
Bu.sh, Carmel. 1994. Survey response and cor-respondence widr author.
FeI'er, Mark D 1994. Taking control ol your
9% LRTS . 40(1) . Sunvner
workers' comp costs. Fortune,Oct 3, 131-J O .
Manes, Stephen. 1994. Odd keyboards mayhelp you type: On the other hand, they maynot. NeuYorktimes, Sept. 27, C8.
Mansfield, |udith A. Ig94. Survey responseand elec'ironic mail to author
' '
Pascarelli, Emil, and Deborah Quilter. 1gg4.Repetitioe struin injury: A computer user'sgzide. New York, Wiley.
Steinhagen, Elizabeth N., and Carolyn J.Mueller. 1992. Ergonomics and the cataloglibrarian. Techniial sensices quarterly i.no.4:29-42.
Ten Have, Elizabeth D. 1993. Prevention oIrepetitive strain injuries: Report of the
ALCTS/LITA Serials Automation InterestGroup Meeting, American Library Asso-ciahon, Midwinter Meeting, Denver,
January 1993 Techni.cal seroices quarterlyI l . no.2:71-75.
Thyfault, Mary E. 1994. OSHA clamps down:Proposes stronger {'ederal RSI regulations.Infoweek, Nov. 21,20.
Ubols, JelI. 1992. Epidemic ofiob-related in-juries puts ergonomics on managers'agen-das. Macweek, Sept. 14,22.
U.S. Department of Labor, OccupationalSal'ety and Health Administration. 1991.Working sufely with aideo displag termi-nals. OSHA: 3092 (revised).
Srerrun Nr oF OwNERSHTr, MANAGE ME Nr' AND Crnculaltol
ExrnNreNp Nrrunn oF CrRCUr.ATroN
/93
Book Reviews
Gregory H. Leozer, Editor
Slid,e Collection Management in Li-brarles anil lnformaiion Units. GlynSutcliff'e. Aldershot, Hampshire, Eng-land, and Brooklield, Vt.: Gower, 1995.219p. $7a.s5 (ISBN 0-56607-580-6).LC94-22678.
delinitive manual of practice, in lhct Sut-clilt'e has produced something dillbrent-a discourse, an essay on the state of the
usual, addition to the field.With the exception of the important
and regular outpul ol'the two peribdicalsof the Visual R6sources Association, Vis-ual Resources, an Intem,ational Jou,mal ofDocum"entation and, VRA Bulletin. theslide librarians' prol'essional bookshell'de-mands little space. The literature of slidecollection management is, as Sutcliffenotes, "incomplete and liagmented" (p.34). (Throueliout this reviJw I use theterms "slideiollection management" and"slide librarianship" interchangeably. TheIirrmer and more inclusive term coversthe literature of slide manaqement re-gardless o l' prol'essional trainir€). That lit-erature, in addition to f'allinp outside o{'mainstream librarianship, is largely out of'date, predating image databises, net-worked images, and the WorldWide Web.
There are .just thirty-two monographswith the subject heading "Libr;ie:s-
Special collections-Slides" in the OCLCOnline Computer Library Center Inc.'sFirstSearch database. Ranging in datefrom 1967 to 1995, these monographs in-clude second editions and duplicaie rec-ords, and consist primarily of how-tomanuals and spiral-bound pamphlets, allbased on first-hand experience or surveysot practice.
Slide librarians are generally awareyears in advance offorthcoming books intheir field. Betty Jo lrvine'.s standard text,Slide Libraries, galvanized the commu-nity of academic slide librarians and slidecurators duringthe late 1960s, and NancySchuller's lengthy manual, Management
forYisaal Resources Collections, was longawaited in the mid-1980s.
Sutcli{I'e's book comes to us from a verydifl'erent imr)etus. Sutclitl'e is the audio-visual librarian at the Learning ResourcesCenter, Calderdale College, Halif'ax,U.K., where the neqlected slide sets andslide/tape programs-led him to concen-
sity of Wales, 1989). Sutclill'es goal is tomake a "coordinating contribution in a{ragmented area of infbrmation work
arts and medical illustration communities.finding little published literature on prac-tices in public hbraries, museums, andphotographic rights and reproductionhouses. He looks at the field with a broad
94/ LRTS . 40(1) o Book Reoi,etPs
perspective and a critical eye, and in-
.lrd"r the "true" slide library smaller and
less-structured slide collections, as well as
slide sets and slide/tape programs in me-
dia centers.
both f'ascinatinq and uneven. Where Sut-
cli{I'e succeeds admirably is in his place-
ment of a multitude of f'actors in a histori-
cal context, bringing these into the
Dresent, and making tliem intelligible and
interesting. This is tiue even when he goes
too f'ar in"one direction or not enough in
another: {br instance, his full discussion of
visual orientation contrasts with the brev-
packaging ot'slide sets to look like books,
and th"e ,r"alue of the "unitary" slide lihrary
over slide/tape programs and slide sets'
In a pure sense the true slide library is that
which has been referred to by one primary
source as made up of "unitary images"'
This distinction is important since '
whereas the tape/slide sequence and the
slide set can be success{ully integrated in
conventional library shelvirrg arrange-
ments the collection of single images by its
very nature requires segregated treat-ment Clearly, almost any body of slides
can be grouped into subsections to form
sets in fixed sequences and it is a crucial
management decision to choose to do this
or to make the basic unit of the collection
the single image. This has a lundamental
e{Iect on the amount of processing work
which is required in identiiying, labeling,
classi{ying, cataloguing and indexing
There is no escape liom the lact that the
collection of unitary images reqtrires con-
siderably more labour to establish, admin-
ister and maintain than does a collection of
slide sets, but it is also inescapable that
such work is an absolute necessity to {'ul{ill
the soecilic needs that such a collection is
consiructed to meet (P. 26).
In his second chapter, "The Literature
of Slide Collection Management," he ex-
amines the literature {rom several &{I'er-
ent historical Perspectives. Discussing is-
sues such as the marginalization of slide
librarians and divisions within the {ield
itself between slide librarians and slide
curators (pro{'essional managers not
trained a.s liLrarians), Sutclill'e'.s long Brit-
ish sentences read almost as asides, but
are rieht on mark.
LJterly a conscious shilt in library educa-
tion has been made away liom the concept
of the librarian being a book manager to-
wards being an infbrmalion manager' This
has been rellected strongly in the content
of degree courses ofl'ered and has ex-
tended to the renaming of university de-
illustrations, in image databases fbr exam-
ple, is likely to con{irm and consolidate this'
it was not until the late 1980s though, that
this trend reached an openly and {u}ly ar:-
1983, 1983-1989, and 1989 to date.
Sutclifl'e also positions the literature intenns of the debates over pro{'essionaltraining, -acknowledging the strengths thatboth slide librarians ind slide
"curators
have brought to the lield, and the imnactthat this division has had on the literat'ure.
However, other chapters are less suc_cessful, such as "The Tlchnic.al prepara-tion of Slides as Stock ltems" and'.Com-mercially Available Slide Managementand - Retrieval packages." His Jhapter"Slide Retrieval" {all.s somewhe.e
^b"-
tween the-practical and the analytical,with an awkward result. Here he ticklesthe still contentious debate over whetherto classify or not, curiously but sensiblycombining it with a prosaii. discussion oi'slide storage systems.
Sutcli{Ie admits to seeing some valuein adapting book classilication schemes{br slides, at lirst a shocking con{'ession.However, his view makes moie sense alterreading the chapter on "Medical SlideCollections," where the practice is com-mon. (It is not common in.art and archi-tecture collections in the United States.)
chapter "Optical Disc Systems and theslid;."
Sutclifl'e'.s book would have benefitedby any one o{'several {'actors. His descrip-tion oI'slide storage systems is one of theareas in which British practice di{I'ers{rom American, and the sa-me is true in theareas ofcopyright and prel'erence lbr ana-log technology. These could have beenc'ompared explicitly and more fully. In-cleed, comparison oI'Briti.sh and American
cess image database software, are serrous
LR?S . 40(1) o Book Ret:ietas /95
omissions. Footnoting could have beenmore specific, pointing more often to ex-act pages or authors. As a state-o{-therartreview, either an annotated bibliographyor a classilied bibliography woultl hav!been more use{ul than one l6ng alphabeti-cal listing. Nevertheless, the"bobk con-tains a wealth of'factual infbrmation notreadily lbund elsewhere, and it achievedits goals. It made fbr productive, stimulat-ing, and provocative reading, and makes avaluable contribution to the literature ofthe lield.-Bq Murylq Snow, ArchitectureSlide Library, IJnh:Lrsitg of Culifomia,Berkeley.
Wonxs CrrroIrvine, Betty Jo . 1979. Slide libraries : A guich
for urudemit. institutions, museunttl untlspecial collections. 2d ed Littleton, Colo.:Libraries Unlimited.
Schuller, Nancy S. 1989. Managemnnt for ais-ual resources collections. id ed.'Bngle-wood, Colo.: Libraries Unlimited.
Collection Management and Deoelop-ment: Issues in an Electronic Era.Proceed.ings of the Aih:anced Col-Iection Management and Der:elop-ment Institu,te, 1993. Ed. peggy
Johnson and Bonnie MacEwi-n.ALCTS Papers on Library TechnicalSeruices and Collections, no. 5. Chi-cago: ALA, 1994. I48p. 924 (ISBN 0-8389-3347-1). LC 94-19300.C ollection M anagemcnt and Deoelop-
ment: Issues in an Electronic Eru containsthe papers given at the first AdvancedCollection Management and Develop-ment Institute in Chicago in I9g3. T[einstitute grew out of a series of success{ulregional institutes on the basics o{ collec-
96/ LRTS . 40(1) . BookReoieus
comes fiom and addresses issues impor-tant to this subset of libraries.
The list of contributors includes someof the best known names in the academiclibrary world, conlirming that the instituteparticipants certainly got their money'.sworth. For the most part, the quality ofthe presentations maiche.s theii replta-tions. Alter an introduction and overview,the papers are grouped around threethemes: "Administrative Aspects," "Im-pact o{ 'New Technologies," and "Finan-cial Issues-"
In his introduction, Joseph f. Braninsummarizes the themes and emphasizesthe changes in collection developmentsince the 198I Stanfbrd institutel PaulMosher, vice provost and director of li-brarie^s at the University of Pennsylvania,provides the "Overview," in which hespeaks ofthe "shattering ol'the knowledgeparadigm and book culture" (p. 8). ni-search libraries are {inding that their Ii-nancial resources
"t" noiirrur"asing as
rapidly as the v<-rlume and cost ol'iew
most traditional. Eugene L. Wiemers dis-cusses "Financial Issues lbr CollectionManagers in the 1990s." His main point isthat the inflation rate fbr library materialsis so much higher than the consumer priceindex that it would be a "national ciisis"like auto insurance and health care ifit didnot apply only to the restricted researchlibrary comrruniW. Two success stories{bllow: Bonnie MacEwan tells how thePennsylvania State University Libraries
donors as the best source fbr collectiondevelopment dollars.
In the section on "Administrative As-pects," Nancy M. Cline begins with "stall'-ing: The Art of Managing Change." Herpremise is that "people are the most im-portant element in libraries" (p. 1g).While she de{ines a long list of competen-cies lbr collection development special-ists, she does not believe that any singleorganizational m<ldel can lit all libraries.Tony Ferguson, in "Collection Develop-rnent Politics: The Art of the Possible,"examines how {undine decisions are madewithin the academic dnvironment. He ar-gues that to succeed, collection develop-ment oflicers must rrersuade their direc-tors to share their vision. Kathle en Zarbreaks no new ground in "Politics andPolicy lrom the Trenches." In her list ofmajor activities, she assumes that the col-lection developer provides public serv-ices, including re{'erence and bibliog-raphic instruction, a point that somewould lind restrictive. She concludes thatboth the generals and the foot soldiersshould share the same obiectives by mu-tually exchanging their perspectives andperceptions.
The first paper in the section on the"Impact of New Technologies" is the mostlucid discussion of copyright that I haveever read. In "Moving Copp'ight to Li-brarians' Action Agenda," Gloriana St.Clair avoids technical details to concen-
interests and its lunction within the schol-arly communication system. For her, "avision of the future in which scholars re-tain the right lbr nonprofit organizationsto copy their articles would be most bene-ficial to society" (p. 61). Next, I worriedthat a 1993 paper on "Collection Develop-ment and the Internet" would be obsoletebecause ofrapid developments, but Peggy
]ohnson avoids becoming immediatelyout-ol'-date by approaching the subjectwith a strong conceptual lbcus. Her or-ganizing metaphor is the Internet as a
Nintendo game that needs the equivalentof'a Nintendo strategy guide with "tools ofthe trade," "best thln-ds," and "enemiesand fbes" (p. 67). In "Computing Re-
important fbr collection development be-cause they "determine the linal outcomeof how inlbrmation is provided to our pa-trons" (p. 91).
Ross Athnson provides a brilliantpiece on "Access, Ownership, and the Fu-ture of Collection Development." From atightly reasoned argument that cannot besummarized in a brief review, he con-
the world of electronic documents. He
principles pertinent to research libraries
papers come together to {brm a coherent
LRTS . 40(1) . Book Rersieus /97
relevant filler.I attended the first collection develon-
ment institute in 1981 and could see fromthis volume just how much the {ield haschanged in its particularities while stillretaining its basic purpose-e{ficientlygetting the most and best infbrmation tothe user community at the lowest possiblecost. The electronic age might end collec-tion development as
-we kiow it, but re-
search libraries are not there yet. Collec-tion development experts will bring pastexpeftise to bear on {uture technologieswithin the context of a commitment toexcellence. I recommend this volumehighly to those who, like me, have an in-terest in collection develooment in re-search libraries. I plan to issign severalpapers to my students when I next teachcollection development. -Robert P. HoI-leq, Library and Information Science Pro-gram, Wayne State Unioersity.
Ailoanies in Library Automation anilNehoorking. Vol. 5 (1994). Ed. |oe A.Hewitt and Charles W. Bailey, Jr.Greenwich, Conn.: JAI Pr., 1994.282p. $7 3.25 (IsBN 1-55938-510-s).For many, the concept of an annual
review of library automation and network-ing will seem anachronistic. In a Iieldcharacterized by sudden and discontinu-ous change, the inevitable delays assoc!ated with assembling, editing, and pub-lishing papers in book lbrm would appearto diminish the currency and usefulness of'contributions. While this work partly sub-stantiate.s this concern, it also proves thatsuch a collection can provide lasting con-tributions to our understanding of com-puting in libraries.
For readers concerned with up-to-date summations ol' the year'.s develop-ments, this work begins with a handicap.
98/ LRTS . 40(1) o BookReaierps
As the editor points out, a series of cir-cumstances beyond the control of theauthors delayed publication and, in f'act,the papers contained in this collectionwere written in 1992 (p. x). As a result, thec'ollection makes scan't or no mention oftopics such as Microsof't Windows, theWorld Wide Web (\\M\M), or WWWbrowsers such as Mosaic and Netscaoe.However, although this collection can tiis-appoint when it addresses specific tech-nologies, it succeeds when it deals withlalger pt-,licy and service issues
In askins "What Can The Internet Do{br Libraries?" Mark H. Kibbey and GeriR. Bunker exemplity the strengths andweaknesses ol' this' collection. Severalproblems cited by the authors at the time.,f *riting, such as the paucity o1'commer-cially aviilable graphic user interfhces,have since been"resolved. However, Kib-bey and Bunker avoid dating their eflbrtby concentrating on policy and serviceissues. They also provide a sketch of thedevelorrment of the Internet that remainsi.rccurale and useful lbr anyone interestedin understanding the spectaculer successof this network. Their vision of the In-terrret'.s development contains valuable in-sights. They clescribe, {br example, theefl'ect of e-mail in leveling hierarchical
tronic services to sell directly to custom-ers, they note, has the efl'ect-ol'bypassingl ibr-ariei. Trr their credit , Kihbey and Bun-ker avoid the temntation to state that theservice rnodels iepresented by print-based libraries and-by the Inteinei willnecessarily coexist smoothly. They recog-nize that ihe lnternet retlec,ts a L.,rlt,ri"
clash" that might aflbct library organiza-tions in deep and possibly problematicways (p. 93).
For librarians considering the acrluisi-tion of a library automation system, Caro-lyn O. Frost'.s"'Next Generation OnlinePublic Access Catalogs: Redelining Terri-tory and Roles" is an excellent primer on
the changing nature of the catalog. Frost'.suse oI'language is appropriate and precise.She obserues that the efl'ect ol'the expan-sion of disitized infbrmation is to reddfinethe "terriIory" or boundaries, oI'the cata-Iog. Traditional catalogs describe and pro-vide locations lbr maLrials owned bv li-braries. Online catalogs per{brm ihisIunction, but also act as gateways to otherresources. This transition blurs our under-
navigating new terrain. Frost describes anumber of experiments that respond tothese challenges. It would be interestingto see a revised version of this paper thattested these problems against the toolsnow available on the Intemet and theWorld Wide Web in order to evaluatewhat, ifany, progress has been made sincethe publication ol' this collection.
Carol Tenopir fbcuses on a specilicarea contained in Frost'.s afticle in "FullText Retrieval: Systems and Files."Tenopir recognizes that, until the mid-1980s, Iibrary catalogs, whether manual orcomputerized, served primarily as Iindingtools. A1ter that time, cheaper storage me-dia permitted the loading and retrieval offull-text documents. Tenopir provides ataxonomy ol' full-text sources, describestechnologies used to access them, andsketches three levels ol'searchins thatmight be built into systems supportingfull-text. Although Tenopir succeeds incharacterizing full-text services, she mighthave done more to draw out the implica-tions oflull text on user expectations andthe demands placed on libraries and li-briuy cornputer systems. The paper alsolacks a discussion of the technical stand-ards that might be applied in libraries tothe management of full text such as theStandard beneralized Markup Language(SGML) .
Although Ibcusecl on specilic projects,
John Ulmschneider and Tracy M. Car-sorso'.soverview of electronic documents deliv-ery systems ltrr agricultural information,and ]udy Hallman'.s examination of cam-pus-wide in{irrmation systems, make use-
ful general points. Ulmschneider and Ca-
public access catalogs and departmentalserver,s_, to a more integrated system link-ing di{I'erent database.s. For libraries that
uncomfbrtably into past practices andtraining. Hallman a.s.te.tr th'ut "Librarian.s
seem rather optimistic.Many of the papers contained in this
collection help librarians involved in theprocurement oI libruy automation sy.s-tems. One contribution is must reading{br any librarian compiling a request lbiproposal (RFP). In "Use of a GeneralConcept Paper as RFP tbr a Library Sys-tem: A New Model lbr Library SystemProcurement," Mona Couts, CharlesGilreath, Joe A. Hewitt, and [ohnUlmschneider share work done at the Tri-angle Libraries Research Network in
LRTS o 40(1) o Book Reoieu;s /99
be viewed as a shopping list ol'specilic,detailed lunctions, but iather u.'ur,
"*-pression of a librarv'.s vision of how tech-nology will serve iti long-term strategies.Trxr olten libraries "Iight the la^st wai" in
authors ot this paperpropose that librariesexpress their vision of the luture and askveirdors to become partners in realizing it.
Although ro-".tih^t dated, th* coltc-tion contains papers that transcend spe-cific products-and services and that ad-dress i.ssues of continuing concern.Particularly lbr librarians involved in sys-tem procurement processes, it providesinvaluable guidance.-fioben Renuud,Uniaersity of Arizona Librury
Deuey Decimal Classification: APractical Cuiile. Lois Mai Chan,John P. Comaromi, and Mohinder p.Satija Albany, N.Y.: Forest Press,7994.21Ip. $40 (ISBN 0-910608-49-0). Lc 93-23733.
Guid.e to the Use of UDC: Anlntroduc-tory Guidn to the Use and Applica-tion of the Unioersal Decimal Clas-sffication. I. C. Mcllwaine, withparticipation fiom A. Buxton. TheHague, Nether]ands: InternationalFederation lbr Infbrmation and Docu-mentation, 1993. 124p. (ISBN 92-66-00-703-x)."The work o{ practical library classi{i-
cation, in its essence, is to lind the appro-priate place lbr a document in the overallscheme of the classification system beingused, and to assign the appropriate nota-tion fiom the classi{ication schedules tothe document. Therefbre, the work oIclassillcation rerluires kn<.rwledge ot' boththe contents ofthe book and thJstructure
100/ LRTS . 40(1) o BookReoieu;s
Long numbers are needed more o{ten asthe 6ody of literature within disciplines,as well as the amount of interdisciplinaryliterature, increases. Construction of cla-s.snumbers can indeed be con{using, even toseasoned catalogers, as the .-"h"dule.themselves expand to accornmodate shiltsin knowledge. In Deweq Decimil Classi-fication: A- Practicul euide, Lois MuChan, |ohn P. Comaromi, and Mohinder
an explanation of'the principles of classi-Iication and as a lunctlional suidebook tothe various methods of num-ber buildingusins the DDC.
Tihe authors have created a guide thatfunctions better as a rel'erence work thanas a textbook. This guide might serve wellas a supplementary text fbr a classroomsituation. As a re{'erence work, however,this guidewould be uselul lbr catalogingstafl'at all levels, as well as fbr those man-
rected study ofthe guide to be fruitful. Inorder to be most ell'ective, it is necessaryto use this work in coniunction with thtclassilication scheme itselfl this is cer-tainly vital in regards to the extensivenumber buildinq exercises that cover theIull range of subj"ect disciplines. The set ofcompiled answers appears at the back oI'the book. The exercises are a handy re-source from which educators, workshorrleaders, and in-house trainers might prot-itably draw
The overall architecture ofthe work isIrom the general to the specilic, and lrt-rmthe simple to the complex. Each chapterprovides a set of objectives, as well as anoveryiew outline of major topics in text-book f'ashion. These iopics-are subar-ranged decimally fbr ef'{'icient navigationofchapter contents. Throughout the work
the authors relate the particular topic con-cerning the cla^ssilication to its philosophi-cal base, so as to illustrate its broadercontext. For example, in chapter 6, "Sy.-thesis of Class Numbers or Practical
ers of the true {unctions of a cataloger.Maior topics are apportioned over the
hook'.s' twelve chapteri. The lirst threechapters cover the philosophy and historyol the DDC alonc with its stnrcture andorganization. Chapter 1, "Introduction tothe Dewcy Deciiwl Classifiuftion," at-tempts to put DDC in context with thedevelopment of other general classifica-tion systems by describing the unique {'ea-tures of the system. Recognition is alsogiven to those individuals who providedmajor contributions or enhancementsthrough each subsequent edition. A brie{,but useful explanation of the revisionprocess via the DDC Editorial PolicyCommittee is included as further back-ground inlbrmation. Of'particular help ischapter 3, "Structure and Organization ol'the Schedules: Notes and Instructions,"which delineates the {unctions and appli-cations ofthe various tr"oes ofnotes fbundin the schedules and-t-ables. Charrter 4,"subiect Analvsis and Classilication of aDocument," describes in explicit, incre-mental steps the principles of subjectanalysis and their application to and usewith the DDC. Chapter 5, "Using theRelative Index," is a w:ell-written exlilana-tion as to the structure, l'unction, and ap-propriate use of'this important l'eature.Alier chapter 5, the major portion of thetext is then given over to explzurations cov-ering the various types of number build-inc within the schedules themselves andali-o utilizing the auxiliary tables. Theguide includes a selected bibliography aswell as a help{'ul cross-re{'erenced index.The brief glossary functions as a supple-ment to the glossary fbund in the {irstvolume oI DDC 20.
No other guide with such a practicalIbcus on number building is as extensiveor elaborate in its detailed explanations. It
is a most compact yet functional guide.Given the current enthusiasms lbrmetadatabases on the Internet, it is litting{br such a text to appear that deals withthe heart of a library: the organization ofdocuments lirr access through an explana-tion ol such a lundamental comrronent ofbibliographlc control as the constructionol classilication numbers. Chan. Coma-romi, and Satija have provided a mostuse{ul service to library users across theglobe.
Guid.e to the Use of UDC: An Introduc-tory Guid.e to the tJie and Application ofthe Unioersal Decimal Clusification,by I.C. Mcllwaine, with participation lrom A.Buxton, "is intended as a purely practicalaid to those who are studying the UDC orwho are using it on a day to day basis lbran infbrmation system of'some kind" (p.5). The text intentionally does not deirlwith the theory ofclassification in general,butwith onlythe UDC in particular. Giventhis scope, the authors have put togethera most worthwhile introductory text lbrboth those individuals and institutionsemploying or considering utilizing theUDC system. The text begins with a rudi-mentary historical and thEoretical exami-
LRTS r a\Q) o Book Reoieros /l0l
nation of the UDC, which is fbllowed byan understandable and informed descrio-tion o{'the structure of the UDC, ar *"llas an outline summary of the arrangementol disciplines and subdisciplines lbund inthe UDb. The maiority of'ihe text is con-cerned with a detailed explanation of thepractical application of the scheme. Thetext is replete with concrete examples thatillustrate the concepts. The linal chapters,"Uses of the UDC'; and "Online ep^plica-tions," provide excellent clarilication onthe lunctionalitv of UDC a^s a universalsystem and on tire multiple tasks this sys-tem can undertake, adding tremendousvalue to the text. A briefgl6ssary oI'rele-vant terms concludes the work.
As with the DDC guide, this text func-tions best as a ref'erence guide. Explana-tions o{'complex concepts are quite intel-Iieible and readable as an introduction t<rtlie system.
Both of these texts are very use{ul asref'erence tools {br all individuals and or-ganizations interested in and involvedwith providing bibliographic control atwhatever level, both now, and in the {bre-seeable future.-SteTthen l. Smith, Uni-Dersitq of lllinoLs ut [Jrbanu-Champaign.
INpsxto ADvERTISERS
AAUPALABaker & TaylorBlackwell North AmericaGaylordKent Adhe.sive/KapcnLibrary TechnologiesLibrary of CongressOCLC Online, Inc.PLAReadmore AcademicTodd EnterprisesUMIWLN
466647I
52,532d c<-lver3d cover
83277
4th covero ' l
61
102/
Lelters
From Birdie Maclennan, SERIALSTListowner/Moderator (Serials Coor&na-tor, University of Vermont); Marcia Tut-tle, SERIALST Associate Moderator(Head, Serials Department, Universityof North Carol ina, Chapel Hi l l ) ; andAnn Ercelawn, SERIALST AssociateModerator (Original Cataloger, Vander-bilt University):
Thank you {br including SERIALSTamong ronr""l; cited in the review article,"Eleclronic Discussion Lists and Joumals:A Guide fbr Technical Services Sta{f'byReich, Brooks, Cromwell, and Wicks(LRTS 39, no. 3: 303-19).
The SERIALST moderators wanted totake this opportunity to respond to theSERIALST reviewer's comments regard-ing the "controversy over motlerated listsw[en discussion of'the FAXON comPanyand news about its sale negotiations werestifled" in the summer of 1994 (p. 3111-
For what it's worth: What the reviewdoesn't say-and what most people prob-ably don'i know-is that the moderators*oiked with each individual who sent amessage that didn't get printed to putthem iln contact with Jtheis who had alsosent messages and were facing the same
dilemmas. edditionally, permission was
obtained from serials prof'essionals at vari-
ous institutions who had done recent ven-
dor evaluations and made decisions to
tionale in calling fbr the moratorium is
documented in the SERIALST archives
of luly 27, 1994; the rationale fbr calling
an-end to it is noted in the August 9,
1994 archives. List discussion about this
tonic resumed alter August 9-i.e., alter
th; tirst round of sale-negotiations had
reviewert perspective in describing the
events of that time brings to light much
about the prot'essional refoonsibilities and
ethical dilemmas of list moderating-es-necially during a time of high stakes' The'"hoi".*
aren't"always easy oiclear-cut, but
we live with them, nonetheless.
/103
Inslruclions for AuthorsMeNuscnrrr SusMrssroN
Manuscripts of articles should be sent tothe editor, Richard p. Smiraglia, palmerSchool of Library and Infbr"mation Sci-ence, Long Island University, Brookville,NY 11548; (5L6)299-2774; i",, (SrO)ZgS-4168; e-mail [email protected].
tive OIIices. lnfbrmation about corrvrightpolicies also is available Inrm e,f.n heXa-quarters.
MANUSCRIPT PREPARATIoN
Please lbllow these procedures lbr pre-paring manuscripts lbr Libra rq Resoun:es{.: Technical Sercices (LRTS):'
L Submit original, unpublished manu-scripts only. Do not submit manu-scripts that are being considered fbrpublication in other venues. Authorsare responsible fbr the accuracy ofstatements included. papers pre-.sented at a conl'erence ihould beidentified with the conference nameand date in the cover letter.
2. Manu.scripts should be machine_printed and double-srraced Threecopies must be provided. Disk corrvwill be requested {iom authors {'oraccepted articles.
House Webster's College Dictionary(New York: Random House. 1991i.
Veri{y the spelling and accuracy of allnames in an appropriate source. Con_yrJt: fhl Chiiagi Manuul of Stqle,14th ed. (Chicago: Univ. of bti"ugoPr., 1993) fbr capitalization, abbie_viations, usage of numbers, etc.
4. Give the article a brief title: i{.the titledoes not fully describe the content ofthe article, add a brief subtitle. Onthe fir"-t page ol'the manuscript givethe article title, the name(s) irl'1heauthor(s), and the posit ion t i t le, inst i-tutional alliliation, and ad<lress ol'each author.
5. On the second page <lf the manu-script give the title followed by abriel, inlbrmative abstract. Do notidentify the author(s) here or else-
an instruction in srjuare brackets.Provide each table
- with a briet,
meaninglul caption9. Be prepared to .supply camera-ready
copy fbr all lllustrations. Accc,mpanythe-manusc_ript with a photocoliy <ifeach,_and abrief , meaning{ul .upiionnoted on the verso.
EotronreI" por.lcy
LRTS is the o{Iicial iournal of the Associa-tion lbr Library Collections & Technical
104/ LRTS . 40(1) o lnstntctions for Authors
Services (ALCTS), a division of theAmerican Library Association. The fbl-lowing statement of editorial policy wasadopted by the ALCTS Board of Direc-tors, ]uly 1, 1991.
Punpose
The purpose oI LRTS is to support thetheoretical, intellectual, practical, andscholarly aspects of the prol'ession of col-Iection management and development,acquisitions, and technical services bypublishing articles (subject to double-blind peer review) and book reviews, andeditorials and correspondence in re-sponse to the same.
AUDIENCE
The audience lbr LfiTS is practitioners,students, researchers, and other scholarswith an interest in collection developmentand technical services and related activi-ties in all types oflibraries.
FnngueNcv
LRTS is published quarterly, with the vol-ume calendar correspon&ng to the calen-dar year. Numbers appear in ]anuary,April, July, and October.
Sr;opn
The editor of LR?S, with the assistance ol'an editorial board. strives to achieve abalance among the articles published inthe journal so that over the volume eachof the sections of ALCTS (Acquisitions,
Cataloging & Classi{ication, CollectionManagement and Development, Preser-vation of Library Materials, Reproductionof Library Materials, and Serials) is repre-sented in the iournal. Articles on technol-oS/, management, and education are ap-propriate to the journal when theapplication ofthese is to issues ofinterestto practitioners and researchers workingin collection development and technicalservices. The scope ofthe articles publish-ed in LRTS is also guided by the "Missionand Priorities Statement" adopted by theALCTS Board of Directors in 1990.
CoNrnNr
The content of LR?S is to include:1. Articles that further the advance-
ment of knowledge in the prof'essionof collection management and devel-opment, acquisitions, and technicalservices by reporting the results ofresearch or other scholarly activity.
2. Periodic literature review'essays ihatdiscuss issues and trends of interestto the membership of ALCTS.
3. Notes that report unique or evolvingtechnical processes.
4 Notes that report unique or evolvingresearch methods.
5. Substantive book reviews of newpublications of interest to the mem-bershin of ALCTS.
6. A briei, {actual, annual statement ofthe association's accomplishments.
LRTS is not an appropriate lbrum lbrbriefreports on new products, new serv-ices, or other current news items.
Onepower-packedCD-ROM that couldrevolutionize yourwork...
Clossificotion Plusfrom the Library of Congress
featuring Library of Congress classification schedules and
Library of Congress Subjea Headings (tCSH)...with hyper-
text links for searching within schedules and between
schedules and LCSH/
U.S. Only...Call | (800) 255-3666 for specifics.Phone: | (202) 707-6100FAX: | (202) 707-t334E-Mail: cdsinfo@mail. loc.gov
Library of CongressCataloging Distribution ServiceWashington, DC 20541-50 l 7
Be sure to see a demonstration ofClossificotion Plus in the Library of
Congress booth at ALA Midwinter.
tAhh W llltE rdPEr!.
CD-ROMTechnologY -
LI&ingltWorkfor Yoa.Call l-800445-8633,
Extension 865.
![LIBRARY RESOURCES TECHNICAL SERVICESalcts.ala.org/lrts/lrtsv30no1.pdf · Instructions for authors appear on p.97 -8 of the] anuary/March 1986 issue of Library Resources & Technical](https://img.pdfslide.net/doc/110x75/5f0e2e147e708231d43dfe37/library-resources-technical-instructions-for-authors-appear-on-p97-8-of-the-anuarymarch.jpg)
