College and Research Libraries COMPILED BY HOWARD F. McGAW Academic Libraries Using the LC Classification System IF ONE WISHES to ascertain whether a particular college library uses the LC classification system, one may consult Table 3 in the Office of Education's Library Statistics of Colleges & Uni- versities, 1963-64; Institutional Data (Government Printing Office, 1965). In the columns below, · the names of all li- braries using systems other than LC have been eliminated, thus concentrat- ing the LC list in a conveniently consult- able table. In addition, two items from Table 1 have been added: type of insti- tution ( grouping by institution has been substituted for the single alphabetical order under each state), and number of volumes- held by the library. As in the Office of Education's report, the institu- tional Classifications are designated as follows: U-University LA-Liberal arts college TEA-Teachers college TEC-Technological school THE-Theological school FA-School of fine arts OTH -Other professional school JC-Junior college TI-T echnical institute SP -Semiprofessional school This arrangement juxtaposes, then, as an example, all of the liberal arts colleges in California employing the LC system, Dr. McGaw is Director of the Library 4nd Chairman of the Department of Library Science, Western Washington State Col- lege, Bellingham. with the sequence according to volume count. College libraries using the LC Classi- fication System arranged by state, by type of in.stitution, and by number of volumes in thousands are listed below. Alabama LA Alaska LA LA Arkansas u California u u u u u u u LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA 88 Birmingham-Southern C 21 Alaska Methodist U 90 University of Alaska 512 University of Arkansas 63 Cal St Poly Kell6-Vohrs 180 U of Cal San Diego 233 U of Cal San Francisco 260 U of Cal Riverside 273 U of Cal Santa Barbara 323 U of Cal Davis 2,006 U of Cal Los Angeles 24 Calif Lutheran C 51 C of Notre Dame 58 Scripps C 65 Orange St C 71 Mount St. Marys C 76 C of the Holy Names 92 Calif St C Hayward 129 San Francisco C Women 132 San Fernando Vly St C 136 Calif Western U _ 172 Long Beach St C 193 Fresno St C 203 LA St C App Arts & Sci 287 San Diego St C 363 Honnold Library I 31 32 I College & Research Libraries • January, 1966 TEA 43 Stanislaus St C LA 73 Lake Forest C TEA 48 Sonoma St C LA 94 Rosary C TEC 12 Northrop Inst of Tech TEA 45 Chicago Teachers C TEC 139 Calif St Poly San Luis North Obis THE 33 Concordia Theol Sem THE 18 Pacific Lutheran Theo THE 42 Luth Sch Theol Rock Is Sem FA 2 American Cons of THE 78 Pacific Sch of Religion Music FA 3 Calif Inst of the Arts OTH 9 Chicago C of JC 5 Lassen C Osteopathy JC 13 Chabot C JC 6 Trinity Christian C JC 20 Fresno City C Indiana JC 26 Contra Costa C u 1,653 Indiana U JC 31 Diablo Valley C LA 31 Concordia Senior C Colorado LA 41 Marian C Indianapolis u 316 Colorado St U LA 79 St. Marys C LA 22 Southern Colorado St C THE 45 St. Meinrad Seminary THE 33 St. Thomas Seminary Iowa Connecticut u 549 Iowa St U of Sci & Tech u 4,703 Yale U u 1,168 U of Iowa LA 63 Fairfield U LA 41 Marycrest C THE 16 Holy Apostles Seminary LA 126 Luther C District of Columbia Kansas u 122 American U LA 118 St. Benedicts C u 37 4 George Washington U Louisiana u 558 Georgetown U u 211 Loyola U THE 14 Oblate C JC 1 Strayer J r C of Finance Maine TI 1 Capitol Radio Engr Inst LA 209 Colby C Florida TEA 11 Ft Kent St Teachers C u 690 U of Miami SP 2 Bliss C LA 43 Barry C Maryland LA 89 U of South Florida u 611 U of Maryland TEC 1 Embry-Riddle Aero Inst u 1,323 Johns Hopkins U JC 4 Hampton Jr C LA 51 St. Johns C JC . 6 Volusia Community C LA 72 Washington C Georgia LA 100 Mt. St. Marys C u 592 U of Georgia OTH 40 U of Baltimore u 788 Emory U JC 7 Anne Arundel Cmty C LA 166 Georgia St C JC 10 Catonsville Cmty C JC 20 Augusta C Massachusetts Illinois u 294 U of Mass u 2,333 U of Chicago u 338 Tufts U LA 23 McKendree C u 607 Boston U LA 38 Maryknoll Seminary u 621 Boston C LA 45 Barat C of Sacred Heart LA 16 Cardinal Cushing C LA 54 Mundelein C LA 35 Merrimack C Academic Libraries Using the LC Classification System I 33 LA 39 Stonehill C Montana LA 57 American International u 295 Montana St U c TEC 31 Montana Sch of Mines LA 60 Suffolk U LA 213 C of the Holy Cross Nebraska LA 271 Williams C :LA 159 Municipal U of Omaha LA 276 Brandeis U New Jersey TEA 32 State C at Framingham· u · 1,138 Rutgers The State ·· u TEC 24 New Bedford Inst Tech LA 59 Inst for Advanced, Study TEC 896 Mass Inst of Tech TEA 64 Newark St C Michigan TEA 65 Glassboro St C u 21 Oakland U Mich St U JC 10 Villa Walsh C u 1,051 Mich St U Agri & App New Mexico Sci u 181 New Mexico StU LA 27 Sacred Heart Seminary LA 28 Duns Scotus C New York LA 55 Siena Heights C u 625 Fordham U LA 108 Kalamazoo C u 716 StU N.Y.-Syracuse U LA 134 Andrews U u 811 StU N.Y.-U of . LA 135 Calvin C Rochester TEC 87 Mich C Mining & Tech u 1,254 New York U FA 13 Cranbrook Academy of u 2,577 Cornell U Art LA 20 Alfred U Col of OTH 36 Detroit C of Law Ceramics JC 46 Delta C LA 23 Notre Dame of Staten Is JC 125 Chas Stewart Mott LA 27 Kings C Library LA 37 New Sch for Soc Research Minnesota LA 43 St. John Fisher C -Inc. LA 86 Hamline U LA 52 LeMoyne C LA 102 C of St. Thomas LA 54 D Youville C LA 124 C of St. Catherine LA 101 Canisius C LA 175 St. Olaf C LA 109 St. Bernardine Siena C THE 34 Northwestern Luth LA 110 Manhattanvl C Sac Theo Sem Heart THE 7 4 Luther Theological LA 123 StU N.Y.-Suny Sem Harpur C FA 4 MacPhail C of Music LA 167 St. Lawrence U FA 19 Minneapolis Sch of Arts TEA 66 StU N.Y.-Suny Cat JC 14 Crosier Seminary Fredonia TEA 86 StU N.Y.-Suny Cat Missouri Geneseo u 817 Wash U TEC 82 StU N.Y.-Suny Cat · u 1,050 U of Missouri Stony Brook LA 21 Covenant C THE 16 St. John Vianney LA 80 Central Methodist C Seminary TEA 104 SW Missouri St C THE 22 St. Vladimir Orth Theo THE 92 Concordia Sem Sem OTH 21 Kirksville C Osteopathy OTH 31 Pace C JC 28 Sch of the Ozarks OTH 37 New York Law Sch 34 I College & Research Libraries • January, 1966 OTH 65 Rockefeller Institute JC 8 StU N.Y.-Suffolk CmtyC JC 11 Monroe Community C JC 13 St U N.Y.-Villa Maria C of Buffalo JC 13 Nassau Cmty C TI 8 Academy of Aeronautics North Carolina U 297 U of N.C. Stat Raleigh JC 15 Asheville Biltmore C North Dakota JC 55 Assumption C Ohio u u LA LA SP Oklahoma TEA TEA Oregon u LA LA LA JC 862 U of Cincinnati 1,664 Ohio St U 38 C of Steubenville 126 Wittenberg U 1 Miami-Jacobs Jr C Bus 64 East Central St C 75 Southeastern St C 460 Oregon St U 104 U of Portland 139 Portland St C 158 Reed C 10 Southern Oregon C Pennsylvania U 152 Villanova U U 633 Temple U U 1,137 U of Pittsburgh LA 32 Holy Family C LA 45 Penn Military C LA 52 Susquehanna U LA 58 St. Joseph C LA 65 Wilkes C LA 71 Rosemont C LA 121 Gettys burg C LA 135 St. Vincent C LA 217 Bucknell U LA 237 Haverford C LA 252 Swarthmore C . THE · 28 Mary Immaculate Sem THE 112 Pittsburgh Theol Sem FA 39 Curtis Inst of Music OTH 17 Womans Med C of Pa OTH 27 Hahnemann Med C & Hosp JC 20 Manor Jr C Rhode Island LA 1,077 Brown U South Carolina U 224 Clemson Agric C South Dakota U 150 S.D. St C Agri & Mech Tennessee u JC Texas u u LA LA LA LA LA LA THE JC JC Vermont LA Virginia u Arts 785 U of Tennessee 8 Martin C 308 U of Houston 609 Texas Technological C 28 U of St. Thomas 37 U of Dallas 74 Austin C 103 Arlington St C 104 Abilene Christian C 480 Rice U 68 Austin Presb Theol Sem 9 Alvin Jr C 11 Texarkana C 55 St. Michaels C 17 U of Va. Clinch Vly C u LA LA OTH JC 1,159 U of Virginia 58 Mary Baldwin C 68 Emory & Henry C 74 Medical C of Virginia 8 Southern Sem & Jr C Washington TEA 120 Western Washington StC JC 13 Olympic C West Virginia LA 50 Wheeling C TEA 50 Glenville St C Wisconsin ;~, U 223 U of Wisconsin -:,:,. Milwaukee :·' .. Academic Libraries Using the LC CltMsification System I 35 u LA LA TEA JC Wyoming TEC TEC 1,542 U of Wisconsin 30 Cardinal Stritch C 58 Carroll C 128 Wis St C Oshkosh 5 Barron County Tchrs C 60 U.S. Coast Guard Academy 190 U.S. Air Force Academy Virgin Islands JC 5 C of the Virgin Is If the libraries are arranged in their institutional groups by size of collection, the results are as shown in Table 1. The range of volumes, as well as the median number, by institutional types, are shown in Table 2. TABLE 1 u N UMB ER OF VOLUMES No. 25,000 1 ' 25,001- 35,000 . . 35,001- 50,000 50,001- 100,000 2 100,001- 200,000 5 200,001- 500,000 15 500,001-1,000,000 17 1,000,001 15 Total, LC . 55 Total, all classifications & per cent LC . 155 FA N UMB ER OF VOLUMES No.I 25,000 5 25,001- 35,000 . . 35,001- 50,000 1 50,001- 100,000 . . 100,001- 200,000 . . 200,001- 500,000 . . 500,001-1 ,000,000 . . 1,000,001 . . Total, LC 6 Total, all classifications & per cent LC 24 Grand total, LC : 250 Grand total, all classifications: 1676* Per cent LC: 14.9 LA Per Per Cent No. Cent 1.8 8 7.8 . . . 7 6.9 12 11.8 3.6 . 34 33.3 9.1 29 28.4 27.3 11 10.8 30.9 . . . . . . 27.3 1 1.0 102 35.5 664 15.4 OTH Per Per Cent No. Cent 83.3 3 30.0 . . . 1 10.0 16.7 3 30.0 . . . 3 30.0 . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 25.0 58 17.2 TEA TEC THE Per Per r Per No. Cent No. Cent No. Cent 1 6.7 4 40.0. 5 31.3 1 6.7 ... 4 25.0 3 20.0 1 10.0 2 12.5 7 46.7 3 30.0 4 25.0 3 20.0 1 10.0 1 6.3 . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .. 1 10.0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . 15 10 16 163 9.2 42 23.8 126 12.7 JC TI SP Per Per No. I Per No. Cent No. Cent Cent - 26 81.3 2 100.0 2 100.0 3 9.4 . . . .. . . . ... . 1 3.1 . . . . . . . . .. .. 1 3.1 . . . ... . . ... . 1 3.1 . . . . . . . . . . \ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .... . . . . . . . . . . . 32 2 2 416 7.7 11 18.2 17 11.8 . . .. NoTE : The size divisions are those used by Thelma Eaton in " Class ification in College and University Librar- ies," CRL , XVI (April 1955), 168-76. • The number of institutions listed in Table 3 is 16 73. Libraries using the LC sys tem are reported in all except the following states: Arizona, Delaware, Hawaii , Idaho, Kentucky, Mississ ippi , Nevada, New Hamp- shire, & Utah. 36 I College & Research Libraries • January, 1966 TABLE 2 Type of Institution High Median Low ------ University ( U) . . . . 4,703,876 607,206 17,025 Liberal arts collefe ( LA) . 1,077,422 73,937 16,701 Teachers college TEA) . . 128,060 64,493 11,199 Technological school ( TEC) 896,513° 45,572 1,754 Theological school (THE) 112,856 33,735 14,509 School of fine arts ( FA) . . . 39,024 8,835 2,350 Other professional school ( OTH ) 74,835 36,560 9,276 Junior college (JC) . . 125,051 11,010 1,000 Technical institute ( TI) . . 8,003 4,353 703 Semiprofessional school ( SP) 2,800 2,229 1,658 • Of the ten LC libraries reported, this one is much higher in volume count than any of the others. The second highest number of volumes is 139,186. SYSTEMS EVALUATION (Continued from page 80) relative efficiency of systems to expand searching in chain or array, or the degree to which systems permit self-verification, self-referral or self-correction, and so on. Possible criteria are limited only by the imagination of the experimentalist. Up to the present, very little has been done in experimental situations to alter only one variable at a time, so that much experi- mentation suffers from the presence of too many uncontrolled variables. The Cranfield project had so many variables going at once that one is seriously justi- fied in asking whether the results mean anything at all. Publicly verifiable re- sults have been remarkably rare in many recent experiments.22 Improvement in methodology, leading to repeatability, is 22 Compare Christine Montgomery and Don R. Swanson, "Machine-Like Index ing by People," Amer- ican Documentation, XIII (October 1962), 359-66, with John O'Connor, "Correlation of Indexing Headings and Title Words in Three Medical Indexing Systems,'' American Documentation, XV (April 1964), 96-104; and A. Resnick and T. R. Savage, " The Consistency of Human Judgments of Relevance,'' American Docu- mentation, XV (April 1964), 93-95 , with A. DeLucia, "Index-Abstract Evaluation and Design," American Documentation, XV (April 1964), 121-25. The DeLucia article covers work based entirely on index terms, while the Resnick-Savage work included other types. Bornstein's comments on this kind of thing are par- ticularly apt. Cf. Harry Bornstein, " A Paradigm ... ," op cit., p. 254. urgently needed in many areas of docu- mentation. What of the future? Currently systems evaluation by comparison testing is es- sentially a negative operation. Baldly comparing what is fundamentally incom- parable unless the criteria which form the basis for comparison are clearly stated is neither objective nor valid.23 Comparison testing does have merit and especially collateral values, provided its lim~tations are honestly accepted. Re- finement in comparison testing technique is called for, particularly any technique which has to do with possible value judgments. It is said that all roads lead to Rome. Let us not judge them all by their approximation to an ideal Appian Way. When the roads are systems for the intellectual organization of information for storage and future retrieval, let us judge each one on its own merits, letting them complement each other, and aim- ing always to keep in mind the variety of needs of users, who are the ultimate authority in the success or failure of any system. • • 23 For an excellent discussion in some detail, see Alan Rees, "The Evaluation of Retrieval Systems," Proceedings of the S econd A nnual Conference on Technical Information Center A dministration, Drexel Insti tute of Technology, Philadelphia, June 14-17, 1965. In press.