ACRL News Issue (B) of College & Research Libraries College No. 11, Decem ber 1970 & Research Libraries N E W S ACRL News Issue (B) of College & Research Libraries, Vol. 31, No. 6 ACRL Board of Directors ANNUAL CON FEREN CE DETROIT, M ICHIGAN 1970 Br ie f o f M in u tes June 29, 1970—10:00 a.m. Present: President, Philip J. McNiff; Vice- President and President-elect, Anne C. E d­ monds; Directors–at–Large, Mark M. Gormley, Norman E. Tanis, David C. Weber; Directors on ALA Council, Andrew J. Eaton, James F. Holly, Andrew Horn, Robert K. Johnson, James O. Wallace; Chairmen of Sections, Robert J. Adelsperger, Ruthe Erickson, Marcia J. Miller, Roscoe Rouse, John E. Scott; Vice-Chairmen and Chairmen-elect of Sections, Julius P. Bar­ clay, Mrs. Joleen Bock, Eleanor Buist, David W. Heron, Carl H. Sachtleben; Executive Sec­ retary, J. Donald Thomas; Secretary, Sheri Pudlo. Not present: Robert H. Blackburn, Herbert A. Cahoon, Sarah D. Jones, David Kaser. Visitors present: Stuart Forth, Everett Vol- kersz, Howard Winger. President Philip J. McNiff presided. Miss Edmonds, reporting on COPES, stated that the ACRL budget as presented was not approved. No new staff positions were allowed, and she further reported that Central Publish­ ing will no longer carry the cost of division journals. It was also decided that in the future the final budget requests should be presented to the ACRL Executive Secretary by December 1, approved by the Board at Midwinter, and go to the comptroller by March. Mr. McNiff reported on the Core Collection Advisory Committee stating that an editor had been hired, but that he had since resigned due to administrative policies. Mr. McNiff then asked the Board for suggestions for possible candidates for the position. He stated that Mr. Clift, Mr. Rutter, and the Executive Secretary had m et with the Council on Library Re­ sources and there had been general agreement that the Council would provide funding for the project in quarterly installments. The Core Col­ lection Advisory Committee’s next meeting is scheduled for July and the project should get under way by early fall. He further reported that the misunderstandings regarding the CHOICE statement of purpose had been cleared up at the Chicago meeting of the CHOICE Editorial Board and ALA representa­ tives. Prior to that meeting, a draft of the state­ m ent of purpose had been prepared, and it received unanimous support of the CHOICE Board and staff, as well as the ACRL Execu­ tive Committee. The Executive Secretary, reporting on the proposal drafted by the Academy for Educa­ tional Development to replace the grants pro­ gram and on the RBS Manuscript Guide pro­ posal, stated that both documents were ap­ proved by the ALA Executive Board at its 318 meeting in Chicago. The United States Steel Corporation has expressed interest in the Acad­ emy’s proposal and there are two possible sources for funding the RBS Manuscript Guide. Mr. Stuart Forth, reporting on the Academic Status Committee, stated that the committee held one meeting at Midwinter and one meet­ ing in May. He stated th at the May meeting was funded partly by ALA and partly by the committee members’ home institutions. After the Midwinter meeting, Mr. Forth had written to various library directors in regard to their approaches to the status problem. Eldred Smith will tabulate the replies. The committee is now compiling Standards for Academic Status, and hopes to present it to the Board at its second meeting. There was a general feeling by the committee members that support from the ACRL central office would be necessary if the committee is going to survive. He further re­ ported th at the committee has received many requests for help with problems of status, ten­ ure, and promotion. The committee is exploring the possibilities of a subcommittee that could meet more frequently to work on such prob­ lems. The Board then discussed the question of funding for the committee. Mr. Tanis ques­ tioned volunteer contributions from the mem­ bership. Mr. McNiff replied that he did not feel the committee should have to solicit fund­ ing and that ACRL should meet these funding needs. Mr. Forth reported that there was consider­ able confusion among members concerning the responsibility for investigating status problems at ALA headquarters. In the past, the Office of Intellectual Freedom investigated some as­ pects of academic freedom, and the LAD in­ vestigated tenure. Mr. Forth then read into the minutes the following statement from the Aca­ demic Status Committee and requested the ap­ proval of the Board: At the Atlantic City meeting of the Ameri­ can Library Association, the ALA Council and the ALA Executive Board stated that academic status is the area of responsibility of the Association of College and Research Libraries. The ACRL Academic Status Com­ mittee considers academic tenure and aca­ demic freedom; i.e. intellectual freedom in the academic community, as an integral part of academic status and, therefore, assumes the responsibility for investigation in these areas. It is further assumed that any other aspect of academic status which crosses di­ visional lines will be handled by the ACRL Academic Status Committee. The statement was unanimously approved by the Board. Miss Edmonds, reporting on the Planning Committee, stated that the committee had in­ vited members of the ALA Council to attend College & Research Libaries N E W S News Editor, Michael Herbison, Casper Col­ lege, Casper, Wyoming 82601. Editor, Richard M. Dougherty, School of Li­ brary Science, Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York 13210. Editorial Board: William Axford, Arizona State Uni­ versity; Richard D e Gennaro, University of Penn­ sylvania; Fred J. H einritz, Southern Connecticut State College; D avid H eron, University of Kansas; Peter Hia tt, Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education, Boulder, Colorado; Ellsworth G. Mason, Hofstra University. ACRL Officers, 1 9 7 0/71: President, Anne C. E d­ monds; Chairman, College Libraries Section, Carl H. Sachtleben; Junior College Libraries Section, Mrs. Jo- leen Bock; Rare Books Section, Julius P. Barclay; Sub­ ject Specialists Section, Eleanor Buist; Agricultural and Biological Sciences Subsection, Joseph C. Shipman; Art Subsection, Peter Anthony; Asian and North African Subsection, Joyce Wright; Education and Behavioral Sciences Subsection, Dr. Sidney Forman; Law and Political Science Subsection, Dr. Otto G. Gara; Slavic and East European Subsection, Dr. Ivan L. Kaldor; University Libraries Section, David W. Heron. News from the Field, Personnel profiles and notes, classified advertising, official matter of ACRL, and other material of a timely nature is published in the News issues of College & Research Libraries. Inclusion of an article or advertisement in CRL does not constitute official endorsement by ACRL or ALA. Production and Advertising and Circulation office: 50 E. Huron St., Chicago, 111. 60611. Change of address and orders for subscriptions should be addressed to College & Research Libraries, for receipt at the above address, at least two months before the publication date of the effective issue. Subscription to CRL is included in membership dues to A CRL of $6 or more; other subscriptions to CRL are $10 per year. Neither subscriptions nor memberships include miscellaneous unscheduled supplements, which are available by purchase only. Retroactive subscrip­ tions are not accepted. Single journal copies are avail­ able at $1.50 each and News issues at $1.00 each from ALA Publishing Department. Indexed in Current Contents, Library Literature, and Science Citation Index. Abstracted in Library & In­ formation Science Abstracts. Book reviews indexed in Book Review Index. College & Research Libraries is the official journal of the Association of College and Research Libraries, a division of the American Li­ brary Association; and is published seventeen times per year—bi-monthly as a technical journal with 11 monthly News issues, combining July-August—at 1201- 05 Bluff St., Fulton, Mo. 65251. Second-class postage paid at Fulton, Mo. 319 its meeting. She further stated that the re­ sponses to the reorganization proposal pub­ lished in the March issue of CRL were favor­ able, and that the Planning Committee had revised its proposal at the meeting on June 28, 1970. She then read the revised proposal [CRL News, September 1970, p. 238]. Discussion then followed on the revised pro­ posal. If the ACRL Board were to approve the statement, the Executive Committee might con­ duct a study to see how ACRL could become a semiautonomous organization, and it was de­ cided that the membership should be given an opportunity to consider this. Miss Edmonds stated that there seemed to be three options with regard to the ACRL role in ALA: 1) The present organization b u t with only type–of–ac- tivity divisions; 2) ACRL’s federation proposal; or 3) ACRL could become a separate organiza­ tion. Miss Edmonds then asked members of our board to distribute the revised proposal to their section members. Miss Buist inquired about the 20 percent proposal for support of the ALA sec­ retariat and Miss Edmonds replied that the en­ tire ALA budget is approximately four million dollars of which ACRL undoubtedly pays the highest percent of any division, but the allow­ ance for the ACRL budget is only minimal. Mr. Horn then asked for a clarification of the three options, and if the proposal comes to the ACRL Board as a recommendation of the Planning Committee. Miss Edmonds replied th at the Planning Committee wanted the ACRL Board’s opinion before submitting the proposal to the New Directions Committee. She further added that the Planning Committee preferred option 3A on page 4 in the ACONDA report. Mr. McNiff reported that there was much discon­ tent among the ACRL membership, and Mr. Gormley pointed out th at this reorganization problem seemed to be a replay of the situation in 1946-47. Mr. Adelsperger questioned what other or­ ganizational patterns had been proposed; Miss Edmonds replied that the JMRT had proposed a type–of–activity organization. Mr. McNiff stated that in his opinion the type–of–activity organization would not be in the best interests of PLA or ACRL. Miss Edmonds indicated that the Planning Committee would be distributing the proposal at the ACRL Membership Meet­ ing. Mr. Weber felt that ACRL should specify the kind of organization required to achieve ef­ fectively ACRL’s goals and needs; i.e. inde­ pendence in salaries and publications, a Wash­ ington headquarters, membership requirements, ACRL Membership October 31, 1970 .............. 11,976 October 31, 1969 .............. .............. 13,769 October 31, 1968 .............. .............. 13,122 and choice of conference sites. Mr. Horn stated that he hoped the Board might agree with the Planning Committee’s proposal, and added that he was endorsing the proposal. Mr. McNiff then asked for approval of the proposal, and the proposal was unanimously ap­ proved. Meeting adjourned at 11:45 a.m. Brief of Minutes July 2, 1970—8:30 p.m. Present: President, Philip J. McNiff; Vice- President and President-elect, Anne C. E d­ monds; Directors–at–Large, Mark M. Gormley, Norman E. Tanis, David C. Weber; Directors on ALA Council, Andrew J. Eaton, James F. Holly, Andrew Horn, Robert K. Johnson, James O. Wallace; Chairmen of Sections, Marcia J. Miller, Roscoe Rouse; Vice-Chairmen and Chairmen-elect of Sections, Mrs. Joleen Bock, Eleanor Buist; Executive Secretary, J. Donald Thomas; Secretary, Sheri Pudlo. Not present: Robert Adelsperger, Julius P. Barclay, Robert H. Blackburn, Herbert A. Ca­ hoon, Ruthe Erickson, David W. Heron, Sarah D. Jones, David Kaser, Carl H. Sachtleben. Visitors: Barbara Bartley, Dean Galloway, Robert Grazier, Mrs. Zoia Horn, Beverly John­ son, Walton Kabler, William Pullen, Joseph Reason, T. Samore, Jasper Schad, Eldred Smith, Everett Volkersz. President Philip McNiff presided. Mr. Eldred Smith, reporting on the Aca­ demic Status Committee for Mr. Forth, stated that the committee had met twice during the week and had finished compiling the proposed "Standards for Faculty Status for College and University Librarians.” The document was pre­ sented to the Board. Mr. Smith then stated that the committee was not in complete agree­ ment on all points of the standards, b ut that there was a consensus on the program in gen­ eral. Mr. McNiff, speaking for the Executive Committee, suggested that this draft be sent to CRL News along with a proposal that the membership submit their comments in order for the Executive Committee to present its response to the ACRL Board of Directors at Midwinter. There was general agreement to this sugges­ tion. Mr. Weber moved that the ACRL Board commend the Committee on Academic Status for performing its difficult assignment well, in­ deed, accept its report of 1 July 1970, and in­ struct the editor of CRL News to print at the earliest feasible time the proposed “Standards for Faculty Status for College and University Librarians” with suitable introductory and ex­ planatory text [CRL News, October 1970, pp. 270-72] by the chairman of the Committee on Academic Status in order to obtain ACRL 320 membership comments prior to the 1971 Mid­ winter meeting. Mr. James O. Wallace second­ ed. Motion carried. Mr. McNiff stated that the Academic Status Committee had been asked to prepare a budg­ et for possible support staff at ACRL head­ quarters. He further stated that this budget had been prepared, received by the Executive Committee, and is now being presented to the ACRL Roard for approval. He pointed out that the committee could not efficiently carry on the charge given ACRL by the ALA Council at Atlantic City without the proper staffing. He further added that it was his hope that the committee could begin to answer some of the pleas for help immediately. Mr. Tanis moved the adoption of the ACRL Academic Status Committee budget. Mr. John­ son seconded. Motion carried. Mr. Theodore Samore, of the LAD Com­ mittee on Statistics for College and University Libraries, asked to speak to the Board. He stated that the USOE had planned to produce school library statistics during 1971, b ut had withdrawn the plan. He further stated that since the money proposed for the school li­ brary statistics is available, he felt it would be a good idea for ACRL to request that a new edition of Library Statistics of Colleges and Universities be undertaken. Mr. Gormley stated that he felt the previous academic sta­ tistics published by USOE were not satisfac­ tory. Mr. Johnson agreed with Mr. Gormley, stating that the reports were published irregu­ larly and were completely unreliable. Mr. Mc­ Niff asked Mr. Samore if this request would be for the fiscal 1971 budget, and Mr. Samore re­ plied to the affirmative. Mr. McNiff then sug­ gested that the ACRL Board look into this pos­ sibility only if assured that the school librarians were not pressing a claim for school library statistics. Miss Edmonds then reported on the Planning Committee. She pointed out that at the previ­ ous ACRL Board meeting the Planning Com­ mittee had gained the approval of the ACRL Board to take the Planning Committee’s state­ ment to ACRL membership. She further re­ ported that a statement to introduce the ACRL federation proposal to Council had been drawn up. This statement had received the approval of the membership. She then presented the statement to the Board: In the matter of reorganization, ACRL has been working along lines similar to the first long-range proposal in the ACONDA report—item 3a on page 4 of the summary of major recommendations. This is the proposal of ALA to become a federation of library associations, a proposal advanced by Mr. Clift in his address to the opening session of this conference. At their meetings this week, ACRL’s Plan­ ning Committee and Board of Directors strongly supported the democratization pro­ posals in the ACONDA report. They urge implementation, as prompt and immediate as possible, of the first long-range ACONDA recommendation, namely for federation. The Planning Committee report was pre­ sented at the ACRL membership meeting for open discussion. After the discussion it was the sense of the meeting that the con­ cept of federation be endorsed. I t was un­ derstood that position papers should be pre­ pared identifying the goals, directions, and responsibilities of ACRL as a federated com­ ponent of ALA. The ACRL Board urges the adoption of the concept of federation now in the best interests of the library profession as a whole. There was general agreement that the state­ ment conveyed ACRL’s reaction to the ACONDA report. Miss Bock added that the Junior College Library Section had approved the federation plan. Mr. W eber asked if the Board would accept amended wording of the third paragraph, and Mr. McNiff replied to the affirmative. Mr. Weber recommended that the third paragraph and fourth line should read: “It was understood that position papers should be prepared proposing a possible organizational structure and identifying the goals, directions, and responsibilities of ACRL as a federated component of ALA.” Mr. McNiff moved that the statement with the revised text be approved. Mr. Gormley seconded. Motion carried. Ed. note: Due to timing difficulties neither this statement nor the AC RL federation pro­ posal were presented to Council. Miss Buist stated that a formal organization structure should be drawn up, and the Board agreed. Mr. McNiff questioned if the federa­ tion proposal seemed to be aiding only college and research libraries, and Mr. Eaton replied that he did not feel th at to be the situation, although ACRL’s primary concern is for aca­ demic libraries. Mr. Horn felt that the propos­ al is in the interest of other divisions also. Miss Edmonds then presented to the Board a proposal to establish a conference planning committee and a local arrangements committee. The following statements were then presented to the Board: Conference Planning Committee. The Asso­ ciation of College and Research Libraries will have at all times two Conference Planning Committees. The name of each will include a date representing the year of the program each committee is planning; i.e., Conference Plan­ ning Committee, 1969/70; Conference Plan­ ning Committee, 1970/71. [See “Preconference Guidelines,” CRL News, May 1970, p. 140] 321 Purpose. To plan the major divisional pro­ gram for the Annual Conference and to co­ ordinate all programs of the various divisional units. The committee will help plan the ACRL Conference exhibit and will prepare a program statement which lists all ACRL programs with a brief description of each. This statement is for the approval of the ACRL Board of Di­ rectors at the first Midwinter following the formation of the committee. Membership. To include the President-elect, Chairmen-elect of the Sections, and the Chair­ man of the Local Arrangements Committee. Duration. Each committee will run for two years. A Conference Program Committee will come into being each year when the election results are known, and will expire after the Annual Conference two years later when this group of officers become Past President and Past Chairmen. Meetings. As it requires a minimum of eigh­ teen months to prepare and budget for a con­ ference program, the first meeting of the com­ mittee should be at the Annual Conference im­ mediately following the elections. At that time, work must begin on preconferences if any are desired [see “Preconference Guidelines”] and a general topic for the conference should be discussed. At the following Midwinter, each member of the committee should have a statement con­ cerning program plans. The committee should check to see that there is no overlapping of subject matter and recommend strengthening or eliminating weak or ineffective programs. The program statement (see purpose above) should be prepared at this time and presented to the ACRL Board of Directors for approval. Additional meetings of this committee will be scheduled as deemed necessary by the chairman. Program Schedules. No conference program may be scheduled which will conflict with the ALA Council or membership meetings, or the ACRL Board of Directors, membership, or program meetings. It is also a good rule of thumb that no section or subsection be al­ lowed to schedule its program for the same time slot. Because of the fact that all divisional programs will be held either during the first or the last part of the week, it may be impossible to avoid some overlapping of committee pro­ grams. Budgeting. A statement of funds needed to support the conference programs must be sub­ mitted to the office of the Executive Secretary during the Midwinter preceding the confer­ ence program. Such a statement should include honoria, travel for speakers, and other ex­ penses which might arise. Local Arrangements Committee. The Asso­ ciation of College and Research Libraries will have at all times two Local Arrangements Committees. The name of each committee will include a date representing the year of the program each committee is planning; i.e. Local Arrangements Committee, 1969/70; Lo­ cal Arrangements Committee, 1970/71. Purpose. To oversee program arrangements at the conference site which would be difficult to arrange from a distance, verify location of equipment necessary for the program, provide local staff for the ACRL exhibit, etc. The chairman of the committee will serve as a mem­ ber of the Conference Planning Committee. Membership. To include a chairman and as many members as the chairman deems neces­ sary to carry out the program plans. The chair­ man of the Local Arrangements Committee will be appointed each year by the President­ elect shortly after election results are known. The chairman of the Local Arrangements Com­ mittee will in turn appoint as many members to his committee as may be necessary to carry out the program plans. Duration. Each committee will serve for two years. The committee will come into being as soon as the chairman is appointed by the President-elect and will terminate after the Annual Conference two years later, when the President-elect making the appointment be­ comes Past President. Miss Bock moved that the Board accept the proposal to establish a Conference Planning Committee and a Local Arrangements Com­ mittee. Mr. Tanis seconded. Motion carried. Mr. McNiff stated that the Extension Li­ brary Service Committee had submitted a re­ vised committee statement of purpose. Mr. Rouse, reporting for Mr. MacDougall, stated that there were no basic differences between the previous statement of purpose and the new one, b ut as the committee is becoming a joint committee with the NUEA, new language was needed. The revised statement was then read: 1. To work in concert with the National University Extension Association and the University Libraries Section of the Asso­ ciation of College and Research Libraries to examine those library services necessary to support all types of university extended services. 2. To discuss mutual problems in extension library services. 3. To report at meetings or through publi­ cations of both of these associations about successful methods of library service to extension students. 4. To strengthen guidelines of library ser­ vice to extension students in order to raise those services to a level commen­ surate with library service available to on-campus students. 5. To work with other divisions of the Amer­ ican Library Association, such as ASD, ASL, and PLA, and provide liaison with 322 other relevant nonlibrary associations, such as the National Association of State Col­ leges and Land-Grant Universities. 6. To arrange program meetings at confer­ ences of both associations as topics of general interest develop. Mr. Rouse moved the acceptance of the new statement. Mr. Johnson seconded. Motion CARRIED. Mr. Pullen, reporting on the Ad Hoc Com­ mittee on Constitution and Bylaws, stated that the committee had m et b u t as they did not know what direction ACRL is headed, they could not compile new bylaws. The possibil­ ity of the committee being discharged was also discussed. Mr. Pullen pointed out the dilemma that the committee will face in the amendment of the ACRL Constitution. Article 9 states that it must be presented to the annual member­ ship meeting and have a two-thirds vote, and again at the next annual meeting for another two-thirds vote. Mr. Pullen also pointed out that the role of the Executive Committee is not mentioned in the Constitution. Mr. McNiíf felt that the committee should propose an amend­ ment which would make a mail vote accept­ able, and also determine the role of the Execu­ tive Committee. Mr. Weber, reporting on the 1969/70 Nom­ inating Committee, stated that the nominations for the 1970 Councilors–at–Large were: Rich- LENDING LIBRARY of FILMS SLIDES TAPES PHOTOS RECORDS EXHIBITS FILMSTRIPS SCIENTIFIC FILMS on FRANCE Catalogue upon request F. A. C. S. E. A. 972 5t h Avenue, New York C it y 10021 (2 1 2 )RE 7-9700 ard O’Keefe, Anthony Greco, Eldred Smith, Evan Farber, Roscoe Rouse, and James Govan. For Vice-President and President-elect: E. J. Josey and Russell Shank. Mr. Johnson questioned the effect which the ACONDA reorganization proposal would have on the number of divisional councilors, and Miss Edmonds replied that it looked as if there will be no nominations coming from the di­ visions. Mr. McNiff announced that Mr. Robert Gra­ zier would like to discuss the possibility of ALA–ACRL accepting a small grant for an an­ nual award in memory of Flint Purdy. Mr. Grazier reported that a Wayne State Univer­ sity committee had commissioned him to ex­ plore this possibility. He further stated th at the committee had a contribution of approximately $1,500, and he felt that an annual award or a medallion might be a good idea. Mr. Weber stated that two years ago a similar proposal was made in another division and the Awards Committee had rejected the proposal. Mr. W eber then suggested a scholarship. Mr. Gra­ zier replied that he could not speak for the committee, but personally he felt that a schol­ arship fund in such a small amount would be meaningless. Mr. McNiff then asked the Board if the Executive Secretary should explore this with the Awards Committee. There was gen­ eral agreement. Mr. W eber stated th at he had been involved in RTSD and LAD Preconference Institutes and had been deeply concerned about the lack of understanding of the members in re­ gard to ALA regulations. He further felt that the ACRL Board should request the Executive Director of ALA to prepare a manual. Mr. W eber moved that the ACRL Board re­ quest the Executive Director of ALA to have prepared for use of all ALA units a manual detailing preconference institute procedures, in­ cluding financial management and allocations of income, staff support, site considerations, use of non-ALA members, and other pertinent data required for effective preconference institute management. Mr. Eaton seconded. Motion carried. Mr. Rouse questioned the status of the pre­ conference request submitted at Midwinter. Mr. Thomas replied that the ULS and RBS pre­ conference institutes were approved. Miss E d­ monds indicated that there was concern about the preconferences as some sections seem to sponsor one each year. Mr. Rouse then stated that a letter had been sent from the ULS ask­ ing that the chairman of the section be made an officio member of the ARL/ACRL Univer­ sity Library Standards Committee. Mr. Rouse moved th at the Board approve this action. Mr. Johnson seconded. Motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 10:30 p.m. ■■