College and Research Libraries BARBARA G. PETROF \· Theory: the X Factor in Librarianship Librarians have come to recognize the value of research to the pro- fession, and much collecting of data is being accomplished. Most of the library literature, however, results from mission-oriented investiga- tion. This is perhaps to be expected since much library research is conducted by practicing librarians who set out to solve their own problems and then report the results in print. There has been little attempt thus far to develop an adequate theoretical framework into which practical research can be hung. Such an examination of the theoretical bases of librarianship will probably have to be made by li- brary educators rather than by practitioners. L -mRARIANSHIP is a very old discipline and . at times in history has been the re- spected occupation of prominent schol- ars. Today, however, teachers of librar- ianship and practicing librarians are often frustrated and exasperated by the low· status assigned to their branch of knowledge by the intellectual world. Philip H. Ennis of the University of Chi- ca'go has stated that " ... the history of librarianship ... [has been] a long spiral of downward mobility ."1 . Librarians frequently are sensitive and uncertain about their place in the aca- demiC spectrum. They offer various solu- tions to the problem, one of these being an emphasis on research. The idea of in- creased research has been readily accept- ed by many, and yet even with special · ~_Philip H. Ennis and Howard W. Winger (eds.), Sev en Questions About the Profession · of Librarian- ship, Twenty-Sixth Annual Conference of the Grad- uate Library School, June 21-23, 1961 (Chicago ~ Uni-verSity of Chicago Press, 1962), p.3 ; 'Mrs-. Petrof is Assistant to the Dean of the School of Library Service, Atlanta Uni- versity. I 316 . emphasis on research, librarianship will have a difficult time finding its proper academic niche as long as the research is not organized within a theoretical frame- work. Scholars in many fields younger than librarianship have realized the im- portance of conducting investigations and experiments with a frame of reference in mind. If librarianship · is to receive its due recognition it must move to higher levels of abstraction ; it must have a theory. Some readers may disagree completely with this thesis; there are some teachers of librarianship and practitioners who believe that the subject matter of the profession caimot afford theoretical treat- ment or that such treatment is not neces- sary. These viewpoints are supported by the fact that at present there is no gener- ally accepted library theory. Of course, this point of view is not new; as a matter of fact, were there a workable theory there would be no need for this paper. The failure of librarians to develop an adequate theory is no indication that one cannot be developed, anymore than the Theory: the X Factor in Librarianship I 317 failure of physicists to develop an atomic bomb prior to World War II meant that it would be impossible to do so. Librarianship needs a theory to pro- vide clarity of conception and to enable librarians to venture into the realm of supposition. This is the belief of many responsible librarians and is further evi- denced by the acceleration of research in librarianship, which in part is a result of the increased participation of philan- thropic organizations, businesses, univer- sities, governments at all levels, and vari- ous other sources, such as the Council on Library Resources. Unfortunately, these efforts have been directed primarily to- ward solving the problems of particular library systems or tO\.yard simple · infor- mation-gathering about current library practices. All librarians are familiar with the how-my-library-did-it type of article which is prevalent in library literature. In addition, many lib~ary spokesmen have voiced resentment and concern about the abusive use of research meth- ods, producing results which have no scholastic value. 2 Some are distressed by the lack of interest in the profession concerning the development of a theory. A professional publication can nearly always be consid- ered a reflection of its readers' attitudes. In writings in librarianship one frequent- ly finds a proliferation of descriptive summaries without an attempt being made to appraise their analytical im- portance relative to the problem or prob- lems involved. Many times relationships and cross-relationships are completely ignored. Few people would question the value of empiricism in developing a real- istic library theory, but facts without theories may be meaningless. It is very difficult to analyze and evaluate empir- ical facts without a proper frame of reference. Library literature has put too much 2 The July 1964 issue of Library Trends is devoted to research methods. Several of the articles offer useful criticisms. emphasis upon research descriptions arid findings at the expense of analysis. As long as research is application-oriented, it is difficult to nurture much hope for a comprehensive theory. The future of a theory depends on efforts at the intel- lectual, individualistic level. This would require a shift in emphasis from fact- finding and application to integration of existing knowledge. Academicians in librarianship, it would seem, must bear the moral responsibility for fulfilling this very important task. Most practitioners' efforts are centered around problem-solving rather than the discovery of new regularities and their elucidation. Environmental pressures and limitations make such action condonable in the case of practitioners, but the same cannot be said for library science teach- ers. Mrs. Joan Robinson, respected British economist, once complained that in eco-:- nomics the gap between the tool-maker and the tool-user is a distressingly large one.3 Librarianship seems to be at the opposite extreme of such a trying situa- tion. Tool-makers are so few in libraria~­ ship that their number is inadequate~ relatively speaking, to create a gap. Gaps and dichotomies within a profes- sion may be considered undesirable un- der most conditions, but a polarity . of theoreticians and practitioners might prove useful for the sake of the expedi- tious development of a library theory. It behooves teachers of librarianship to as- sume the leadership in making work~ble and reliable tools available . to library practitioners. Practitioners in turn should generously support academic efforts in developing a library theory. Such efforts may not produce immediate tangible benefits, but the results will be reward- ing in the long run. A reliable theory, the whole, will undoubtedly prove to be more useful than a mere collection , of descriptive data. • • 3 Joan Robinson, The Economics of Imperfect Com- petition (London : Macmillan and Company, 1948); p.l.