College and Research Libraries STANLEY McELDERRY Readers and Resources: Public Services in Academic and Research Libraries, 1876-1976 EVENTS OF THE PERIOD FROM 1876 TO THE PRESENT have largely determined the character of the academic and research library as we know it today. A century ago the typical academic library was a miscellaneous assortment of books, pri- marily gifts, few in number, poorly housed, and scarcely used. In his contri- bution to this series Holley assessed the status of academic libraries in 1876: In 1876 there were 356 colleges and universities in the United States. They had 25,647 collegiate and 597 gradu- ate students taught by 3,352 instruc- tors. These colleges also enrolled an additional 28,128 students and em- ployed 568 instructors in their pre- paratory schools. Students and faculty members had some kind of access to 1,879,103 volumes in their college li- braries plus an additional 425,458 vol- umes in various society libraries.l The Digest of Education Statistics 1975 Edition indicates that in 1972-73 there were 2,908 institutions of higher education (presumably with libraries) serving a . student population of 9,298,000. There · were a total of 406,790,000 volumes in these libraries with an annual rate of growth of 25,095,000 volumes. The library staff 408 I numbered 53,876 persons, of whom nearly 50 percent were professional li- brarians. Total operating expenditures amounted to $866,838,000 annually. 2 The remarkable growth and transfor- mation of higher education since 1876 may be attributed to a wide range of factors. Perhaps the most significant change was in the nature of society it- self. The transition from an agrarian to a highly developed industrialized so- ciety created many new occupations re- quiring substantial formal training. The academic curriculum, which had for many years been classical and elitist in character, gradually became hospita- ble to a broad range of functions. At the same time the population of the U.S. increased more than fivefold be- tween 1869 and 1972, but the college-age population attending institutions of higher education increased from 1.68 per 100 population to 51.52.3 Of even greater significance to library development was the increased emphasis on research which accompanied the ex- pansion in scope of curriculum offer- ings. The emergence of the German- style research university, exemplified by the founding of Johns Hopkins in 1876, marked the convergence of forces I prevalent in higher education to insti- tutionalize research within the univer- sity. This move led to the pursuit of knowledge for its own sake, higher stan- dards of scholarship, and acceptance of the responsibility for dissemination of knowledge. In tum, universities began to accumulate the resources required to support serious intellectual endeavor: trained researchers, able students, so- phisticated laboratories and equipment, collections of artifacts and specimens, and comprehensive library collections. By the beginning of the twentieth cen- tury the university had become a major sponsor for organized research. 4 Of interest here is the rapid develop- ment of significant research resources by the major university libraries, quick- ly overcoming the lead of scholarly so- cieties and institutes. One century later fifty or more academic research libraries would individually equal or surpass the combined library resources available to the scholar in 1876. Of equal significance to academic li- braries ·was a parallel revolution taking place in instructional philosophy and methods. Brubacher describes the pat- tern of instruction derived from the English college, which persisted in this country through much of the nine- teenth century, in these terms: The two most popular methods of in- structing during class periods were the , recitation and the lecture. Although more popular in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, the recitation methods gradually yielded ground to the lecture method, especially in the nineteenth century. The heart of the recitation consisted in an exchange be- tween the tutor and the student, the tutor citing an·d the student reciting. The citation was usually an assignment in a textbook, but might just a's well be a previous lecture or demonstra- tion. In the recitation the student learned his lesson, at least the portion for which he was called in class. 5 Readers and Resources I 409 Curricular reform came in the form of expanded course offerings, an elec- tive system allowing free choice of pro- grams on the basis of interest, problem- oriented instruction, and other peda- gogical techniques. The significance of these reforms to the libracy was that in- struction was centered upon student in- terests, the student assumed a larger share of responsibility in the instruc- tional process, and problem-solving skills acquired an importance equal to or greater than the acquisition of in- formation itself. The library as an instrument for in- struction and research emerged as a suf- ficient body of information, in active · use, required systematic acquisition, or- ganization, and the guidance of a pro- fessional staff. The status of the academic library in 1876 has been comprehensively treated by Holley, Carlton, and others.6 • 7 Changes in educational philosophy and methods as related to libraries have been described by Brubacher and Rudolph. s. 9 The purpose of this paper is to trace the major trends in service to readers in academic libraries during the past cen- tury . . In a sense one could state that the academic librarian in the period since 1876 has consistently promoted greater access to informational materials. Con- sequently, it is essential to examine thinking relating to library resources and facilities in addition to direct per- sonal assistance to readers to understand current concepts of public services. For purposes of discussion, several periods are identified which represent an ap- proximate emphasis in chronological se- quence; these are: ( 1) accumulation of materials, ( 2) organization of resources, ( 3) personal assistance to readers, ( 4) organization patterns, and ( 5) physical facilities. AccuMULATION OF MATERIALS As Holley and · Carlton indicated, the ... 410 f College & Research Libraries • September 1976 college in 1876 was remarkably similar to ·its colonial counterpart, and little change in function, curriculum, or in- structional method occurred until the latter part of the nineteenth centu- ry.lO, 11 Since 1876 the growth and de- velopment of academic institutions have been rapid, and the library has shared in this transformation. In a study of a selected group of col- .leges and university librarians under- taken in 1924 for the Association of American Universities, Works indicated that between 1900 and 1925 student en- rollments increased from 175.3 percent at Vasser to over 1,300 percent at Oregon with a 400 percent increase typical of the group. Noting that book collections had grown at approximately the same rate as the student body, Works was nonetheless concerned whether the li- brary was equal to its new responsibil- ities. He cited the increased body of knowledge, new methods for creating and imparting knowledge, changes in in- structional methods, and the emphasis on graduate instruction and research as contributing factors to the increased re- sponsibility of libraries.12 Although comprehensive statistics for academic libraries were to appear later in more consistent form, there is ample evidence to indicate that the expansion of collections began about the turn of the century and has continued almost unabated until the present time. In 1973 Baumol and Marcus described the ac- ·celerating growth pattern of the 1950s and 1960s.13 It seems clear that an initial response of librarians to their increased respon- sibility was the rapid accumulation of informational resources. Some concept of the variety of materials which this entailed for a research library is re- vealed in the following quote from Downs: These; then-the separately printed books, serials, government publica- tions, and mahuscripts-are the prin- cipal types of resources for research. They fail by far, however, to exhaust the varieties of records being accumu- lated by libraries today. Look, for il- lustration, at the statistics of holdings reported annually by the Library of Congress. We find there figures for each of the following groupings: vol- umes and pamphlets, bound newspa- per volumes, manuscripts, maps and views, microcards, microfilms, motion pictures, music, phonograph records, photographic negatives, prints and slides, fine prints, and a miscellaneous catch-all, comprising broadsides, pho- tostats, posters, etc.-an even dozen headings, most of them numbering hundreds of thousands or millions of items. It would be a very , backward li- brary indeed, nowadays, which failed to make liberal provision for such non- book research materials as maps, slides, motion picture films, music and speech recordings, music scores, prints, and a score of other similar classes.14 I r The preoccupation, perhaps even in- security, of librarians with collection ~ development is reflected not only in aca- demic library growth patterns but in ~ continued efforts to attain comprehen- .y- sive coverage through intrainstitutional cooperation and national programs such ~ as the Farmington Plan and the Nation- al Program for Acquisitions and Cata- ., loginhig. 1 h . . . .!.. W · e t e major umvers1bes were suffering from embarrassment of riches, "·- conditions in many college libraries ~ were the opposite. Randall undertook an assessment of college libraries for 'II the Carnegie Corporation in the early 1930s and discovered that ... more than one-third of the num- ber studied (205) spend less than $5,000 per year on their libraries; and that almost another third spend be- tween $5,000 and $10,000, leaving less than one-third (59) which spend more than $10,000 per year. The aver- age expenditure, in round numbers, is $9,100 per year. One hundred and thirty-one of these libraries spend less. This is roughly two-thirds of the total number. 15 Randall cautioned against drawing too literal an interpretation of the statis- tical data and enumerated a number of variables which would account for vari- ations from one institution to another. Nonetheless, he was struck by the varia- bility of the data. He concluded: It appears to the writer that the most significant single factor in these data regarding the financial aspects of col- lege libraries is their range. This range in expenditures for various purposes indicates, if not a lack of uniformity in purpose, at least a lack of uniformi- ty in method. In other words, however well the theoretical function of the college library may be realized and un- derstood in the various colleges in this group, the methods employed in carry- ing out the function differ widely. It appears evident, admitting that we know well what college libraries should do, that the methods of doing furnish a fruitful field for study and thought. 16 Randall's response to the problem of disparity of method was to attempt the formulation of standards for college librarians17 and to be prescriptive in statements about college library prac- tice.l8 It is of interest to note that this kind of response has been characteris- tic of librarians as the profession has emerged: first the accumulation of re- sources for service followed by an at- tempt to assess whether libraries were responding adequately to the changes occurring within the institution and fi- nally an attempt to codify an accep- ~ table level of practice in the form of standards. Ruggles, reviewing the status of col- ~ lege libraries in 1968, n?ted that: A large number of undergraduate li- braries in the U.S. lack sufficient scope and depth to provide adequate support Readers and Resources I 411 of the instructional programs of their institutions. The average number of volumes in the top 60 junior colleges in the nation was 26,620 in 1964 (the latest year for which detailed statis- tics are available), while the average collection of all (colleges) was 79,250, the median 54,100 and the lowest 80 collections averaged 24,625 .... In 1962/63 73% of 4-year college libraries and 91% of 2-year junior col- lege libraries fell below ALA ( Amer- ican Library Association) minimum standards for size of collections.l9 The response of the library profes- sion to this situation has been to revise the standards for two-year colleges and four-year colleges and to attempt to make a more convincing case for in- creased support.20• 21 ORGANIZATION OF RESOURCES The rapid growth of library collec- tions and their conscious use as an in- structional resource in the latter part of the nineteenth century produced an im- mediate response from librarians. It was obvious that as collections grew in size devices were needed to provide efficient access to available resources. Readers needed to know not only whether a col- lection held certain titles but where they could be located. Later it became impor- tant to identify available resources by subject. These needs were met in a variety of ways. Although there is no careful study of the causal relationship between spe- cific events, it seems reasonable to hy- pothesize that as librarians attempted to resolve problems of bibliographic and physical access to growing collec- tions, a number of responses occurred. First, the librarian would attempt to respond to readers' needs empirically by ad hoc techniques. (The ministration to individual requirements has been a carefully guarded prerogative of the professional librarian even in the face of standardization and mechanization.) The need to share information about v 412 I CoUege & Research Libraries • September 1976 problems and hypothetical situations led to formal organization as a profession, and ·the founding of the American Li- brary Association in 1876 would seem to indicate somethin'g about technical needs . and the status of libraries at that time. · A second response which seemed to emerge was the codification of best prac- tice · as a professional association sur- veyed current practice and evaluated al- ternative approaches. Sometimes the "best practice" emerged alniost as the product of a single person22 but later became a team effort23 through contin- ued professional association. A further development was the emergence of training agencies to disseminate infor- mation about typical problems and cur- rent "best practices." It seems logical that library schools began to emerge toward the close of the nineteenth century and the beginning of the twentieth century as libraries were beginning a period of rapid ex- pansion. A further bit of evidence which lends credence to this hypothesis is the simultaneous emergence of bib- liographic guides and texts on various aspects of library practice during the early part of this century. The pressure to accumulate resources and to organize collections for use seemed so compelling that librarians be- came overly. preoccupied with the tech- nical aspects of librarianship and ne- glected direct contact with readers. Rothstein has documented thoroughly the slow emergence of reference ser- vice.2' Librarians seemed to feel that if bibliographic tools were provided and materials were efficiently arranged, read- ers could serve themselves. It is of in- terest that many standard reference tools emerged during the early part of the twentieth century, reflecting the re- liance on indirect approaches to service to readers. · · The · initial preoccupation of librari- ans with techniques is summarized by Branscomb in these terms: As stated above, .the last · several dec- ades have been for libraries a period characterized primarily by the acquisi- tion of materials. Libraries have dou- bled and quadrupled in size. This ac- cumulation created acute problellls of ~rganization of the materials secured . . How should these books be grouped on the shelves? · How should they be cataloged? Inevitably, the technical problems dominated the attention of librarians. One who doubts this need only look over the program of profes- sional library meetings or leaf through the pages of the professional journals. To be good librarians those who held that title had first of all to be efficient technicians. Circumstances made it al- most inevitable that they would be concerned with books rather than with students. It is easily understandable that some of the larger problems of the college problems closely related to the task of teaching, should have been left largely to the attention of others.25 PERSONAL AssiSTANCE TO READERS As the previous discussion indicates academic librarians believed that in sys: tematically acquiring resources for in- struction and research and in cataloging and classifying these resources thor- oughly, they were discharging their re- sponsibilities in serving readers. The no- tion of providing direct personal as- sistanc~ to readers was not immediately s~H-eVIdent. In fact it was stoutly re- sisted on many quarters as impractical and emerged only gradually. Rothstein describes the initial stages of what came to be known as reference service in this manner: . . . the history of reference services could show a number of important steps already taken. The first step had been the statement of the desirability of personal assistance, · reflected in practice by the willingness to offer guidance to individual readers, though this help was rather casual and inter- mittent. The next stage was distin- guished by the recognition of a felt j ( need for , a . program of · personal assist- ance, if only . to supplement the other means of ~eeting , the .. needs of read- ers. More .and more libraries were then offering per~onal help as a useful ad- junct to the other "aids ·to readers." With the growing concern over the li- brary's role as an educational institu- · tion, personal assistance came to be seen, not as peripheral, . but as central in the library's responsibilities, a ser- vice which , would require personnel with special training . and expressly as- signed to the task of interpreting the library's resources. As personal · as- sistance came to be recognized as an important feature of library service, it acquired a distinctive name-"refer- ence work" -and departmental sta- tus.26 Even with the acceptance of the need for reference service, there was no con- sensus on what functions were appropri- ate for the academic library to offer. As described. by Ro.thsteiil, "interpreting the catalog to the presumably befud- dled reader became the most common task of the reference librarian"; and even here the service was reserved for the uninitiated. 27 Poole saw a much more direct rela- tionship between the library and the in- structional program as expressed in ·a paper entitled "The University Library and the University Curriculum": I wished . to show that the study of bibliography · and of the · ~cientific methods of ·using books should have · an assured· place in the university cur- riculum; that a wise and professional bibliographer should be a member of · the faculty and have a part in training all the students; that the library should be his classroom; and that all _ who go forth into the world as graduates should have such an intelligent and practical knowledge of books as will aid them in their studies through life, and the use of books be to them a per- petual delight and refreshment. Books are wiser ··than · any professor ·and all the facility; and they . can be made · to give up much of their wisdom to the Readers and Resources I 413 student who knows where to go for it, and how to extract it. 28 Another half century or more . was to pass before Poole's ideas were to . re- ceive a serious hearing. Even under the current rubric of . the library college movement, the concept is preached more than practiced. · · ·, Rothstein identifies three · philosophies of reference service which emerged ' with the · development of reference ser- vice and ·which are still prevalent today. These are: ( 1) the conServative ap- proach, which limited the reference li- brarian to teaching readers 'to be . self- sufficient in using the library; ( 2) the moderate position~ which was character- ized as "a compromise between guidance and full information service, · between a laudable desire to be of maxim.um as- sistance in important investigations and realistic reservations about the ·ability of the library to do so"; arid ( 3) the liberal theory, which promoted "full and direct supply of reliable informa- tion," differentiated between levels of inquiry, and guaranteed the "authentic- ity and relevance of the inforination it supplied."29 Most academic library policies which emerged were based on empirical data deriVed from the experience of prac- ticing librarians. Service policies ·which gained currency were those which met a demonstrated need and which . could be supported, and there was always a wide range in the quantity and ·quality of services rendered whether . argued on economic or philosophical grounds. In his survey of college libraries in 1930, Randall urged a more rational ap- proach to formulation of library pol- icies. He stated: If the college library is to . respond to the challenge of modem higher educa- tion, its reformation must be : rational. It would be exceedingly unfortmiate if the <;lecisions governing changes were eyer made without the aid of re- liable evidence. Too many arbitrary j 414/ College & Research Libraries • September 1976 judgments have been made in the past, induced, no doubt, by the exigencies of critical situations. This is not an ideal procedure. 30 This dictum has been followed by li- brarians in the area of services to read- ers perhaps more than in any other as- pect of librarianship. In any event it was one of the first areas for attack by the new Graduate Library School at the University of Chicago, founded in 1926, which pioneered the application of scientific methods and research in the solution of library problems. The users of libraries come under careful scru- tiny to find out. more about their read- ing habits and the factors which pro- mote reading as a guide to definition of service to readers. A study undertaken by Branscomb in 1937 for the Association of American Colleges posited a key question concern- ing college libraries and proceeded to answer the question by drawing on studies of reading previously conducted at the Graduate Library School and add- ing other original data. After describing the rapid growth of academic libraries from 1900 to the late 1930s, Branscomb stated that: The problem of the college libraries can be stated very simply. It is that of securing a sufficient use of these en- larged resources to justify the invest- ment that has been and is being put into them. To this problem neither li- brarians nor college faculties for the most part have given a great deal of attention. In the developments of the last 25 years more emphasis has been placed on the acquisition and preser- vation of library materials than upon their use. The means have absorbed more attention than the ends. The li- braries have expanded greatly, but the use of them by the undergraduates, on whose account primarily they were ac- quired, is in most institutions as will be shown later, distinctly disconcert- ing. This central problem has several aspects depending upon the point of view from which it is considered. 31 The work of Branscomb ·was not only novel in the questions it raised but also in its approach to answering them. Af- ter documenting the disparity between resources available in college libraries and their limited use for instructional purposes, he advocated the development of a distinctive program for the college library based on its role in the educa- tional program of the college. This pro- gram should be formulated by an ob- jective appraisal of the college program and not by imitation of public or uni- versity library models. These prescriptions ran counter to the approach described earlier where "best practices" were codified and formulated into standards for application to types of libraries. Although Branscomb's study is not a model for the solution of college library problems through the ap- plication of scientific methods, it did draw extensively upon research studies, and it did question basic assumptions about library service in provocative ways. The work of B. Lamar Johnson at Stephens College is an interesting con- trast to the survey of Branscomb.32 In a seven-year study ( 1932-39) Stephens College undertook a program "to make the library contribute as effectively as possible to the instructional program of the college." The study describes the empirical approach to increase library utilization by carefully integrating the library into the instructional program and by increasing physical access to books. The Stephens College . approach was to be repeated twenty years later by Patricia Knapp in a more carefully con- trolled and documented experiment at Monteith College. 33 This work was an attempt to apply the findings of a de- tailed study of library use at Knox Col- lege.34 The reading of college students was analyzed from every conceivable point of view by students . at the Graduate Li- ~1 1 j brary ·School; and a considerable body of information was acquired to guide librarians and faculty in making the ·li- brary a more useful part of the academ- ic program. One of the better sum- maries of this work was prepared ·by Asheim for presentation at a symposi- um on reading on the occasion of the dedication of the undergraduate library at the University of Michigan.35 The impact of these studies on read- ing has been ·a better understanding of how library policies can promote read- ing. Understanding of the relationship of physical access to reading has result- ed in relaxation of closed-stack policies, the establishment of collections for rec- reational reading or of special displays, and publicity to encourage reading. Hours of access were extended, and re- strictive loan policies were modified. Li- brarians began to appreciate alternative forms of information as purveyors of f knowledge by aggressively exploiting audiovisual materials for their instruc- tional value. In brief, the scientific analysis of reading and the factors which promote its use revolutionized thinking about methods for serving readers. ~ ORGANIZATIONAL PATTERNS The better understanding of user be- havior has also had an impact on the or- ganization of reader services. Changes in policies cited earlier helped promote access to materials; but various organiza- t. tiona! issues arose as collections grew in scope and in variety of resources, and as the increase in user population pro- duced greater demands for service. Ref- Itt ·~ erence service was gradually accepted as a legitimate function of the academic library and accorded departmental sta- tus about 1915.36 The increased quan- tity of specialized forms of material, such as documents, periodicals, maps, rare books, manuscripts, as well as ·foreign-la~guage collections, led to the creation · of numerous subdivisions in Readers and Resources I 415 the larger libraries. The general tend- ency was to segregate materials, which were troublesome because of form, lan- guage, or other special handling prob- lems, into separate units.37 In addition, it was deemed desirable by the more progressive promoters of reference service to develop subject specialization within a general reference department. In some cases the geograph- ic expansion of university campuses led to the creation of separate departmental libraries particularly in the sciences. These units often developed specialized subject reference services. But branch library development was not a logical development based on an analysis of user requirements. The university, following the Ger- man seminar approach to instruction, and the autonomy accorded to subject fields in pursuing research tended to foster a highly decentralized organiza- tional pattern. The problem for the university library was attempting to de- velop some rational pattern of service based on the balancing of user require- ments with economy and efficiency of administration. The arguments for cen- tralization and decentralization were stated in definitive form by Robert Miller, 38 but the issue was frequently decided on political grounds. Substantial research was devoted to analysis of user patterns in various aca- demic disciplines.39 The concern was to determine the boundaries of most-used literature on the one hand and second- ly to find a more rational basis for the physical location of library resources on a university campus. Considerable un- derstanding was gained from these stud- ies about the date, form, and language boundaries of the active literature and the substantial differences between disci- plines. A more accurate definition was also obtained about the overlap in user patterns between disciplines. The practical application of this re- search was the formal provision for 416 I College & Research Libraries • September 1976 storage of little-used materials in coop-· erative facilities such as the Midwest In- ter-libnii-y Center (later the Center for Research Libraries ) and in compact storage facilities or microform. The same line of reasoning has led to cur- rent planning for a more formal struc- turing of access to specialized resources through a national lending library · or through the center of excellence con- cept for non-Western materials and for other unique materials. An attempt at a rational organization of library resources according to ob- served interrelationships among disci- plines is demonstrated in the organiza- tion of the new Joseph Regenstein Li- brary at the University of Chicago.40 In this instance normal subject arrange- ment by classification was abandoned for subgrouping of the subjects most commonly used by major academic dis- ciplines. A variety of efforts have been made to organize university library collections and services along broad subject lines. The divisional plan as this approach is called was initiated in the early 1930s by Ellsworth at the University of Colo- rado,41 Van Hoesen at Brown Univer- sity, and Lundy at Nebraska. The di- visional plan was incorporated in the service pattern of a number of new aca- demic library buildings · following World War .II. There were a number of variations in this approach. In some instances a V general reference department was re- tained and a number of subject refer- ence units added. In other cases, the gen.,. eral reference department was . aban- doned or · greatly reduced in scope, and t~e reference burden was placed on the subject divisions. There was . also an infinite variety in the relationships of collections to ser- vice units. In some cases the .most-used materials (the core) were placed in the subject division and the · balance of the materials kept in a central stack. Exam- pies of this approach in the .1950s were the University of Wisconsin Library and the Michigan State University Li- brary. . The majority of libraries seemed to prefer, or earlier experience dictated, a loose association of. service points in an integrated collection kept in straight classification order. There were also in- stances of more complete integration of functions, such as acquisitions, catalog- ing, serials control, reserve books, with subject division (e.g., Nebraska, Wash- ington State) ; but this pattern tended to be more costly in staff. Another organizational pattern which ~ / gained adherents as .enrollments grew ~ 1 was the separation of graduate and un- dergraduate library services. · Although separate service points ·for undergrad- uates were established by -Columbia and 1 Chicago in the 1930s, a physically sep- ~o­ arate building (the Lamont Library) was erected for undergraduates by Har- vard in the late 1940s, which gave this concept more prominence. Similar development followed on a number of campuses. This trend was documented in detail by Braden.42 Al- though there may have been sound pedagogical reasons for establishing un- dergraduate libraries, the motivation of- ten seemed to be a practical approach to an . acute space problem. The issues treated in a symposium on, undergrad- ua~e library service· in 1953 still appear to be unresolved.43 . An approach to organi~ation of ref- erence service by level of function hint- ed at by Rothstein in .his qescription of the liberal reference .. policy, 44 has not been systematically developed. Various classes or levels of need for s.ervice are t- recognized, such as . directional and orientation. services, folJllal library in- " struction, bibliographic assist~mce, quick reference search, and, ,specifilized sub- ject guidance. The deve~opment of new approaches to bibliographiG searching through : ~n-line machine-;readal)le data . , ;1 I . , bases is forcing a careful assessment of the value and methods for incorporat- ing new technology into traditional ref- erence patterns. The general conclusion concerning or- ganizational patterns is that although we have learned a good deal about pat- terns of use by different classes of read- ers, we are a long way from being able to resolve issues on how to organize ref- erenc~ service efficiently and economical- ly on rational grounds. Value questions relating to the relationships of the li- brary to the instructional and research program of the university weigh heavily in the decision of how much service the '+ library should support. PHYSICAL FACILITIES The provision of facilities for read- ers has been closely related to the or- ganizational issues previously described. Often the library building was a major limiting factor to the adoption of a new pattern of service. Library architec- ture tended to be dominated by archi- tects prior to World War II and reflect- ed little understanding of the require- ments of users or operating patterns. The Cooperative Committee on Library Building Plans instituted by academic librarians in 1947 was an effort by per- sons interested in or in the process of planning .a new building to define re- quirements more systematically and to learn more about architectural consid- ~ erations. These discussions have evolved into the continuing library building in- stitutes now sponsored by the Library Administration Division of the Amer- ican Library Association. The accumu- lated knowledge derived from these dis- • cussions is reflected in the publications of ALA and monographs by Burchard ,., et al., Ellsworth, Fussier, Metcalf, and others.45-49 The experience which has been ac- cumulated from these discussions has led to the design ·and construction of ;.. functional, flexible buildings which can Readers and Resources I 417 be more efficiently operated and to the adoption of many features for the · con- v~nience of readers. The substantial body of research on user behavior is re- flected in the facilities now afforded the user of a modern academic library building. Extreme care has been given to create a comfortable, quiet, well- lighted environment for study. Attention has been given to the need for freedom from visual districtions by creation of smaller, more isolated read- ing areas. Seating and other facilities re- flect the variety of activities which oc- cur in the library and the variations in taste. Secluded study carrels are provid- ed in quantity, standard library tables are dispersed among the stacks, and lounge furniture is provided for :more informal seating. Special provision is made for typing, photocopying,· group study, microform reading, and use of audiovisual devices. Care has been given to relate library resources and service points to study areas. Provision has been made for the dis- play of materials to familiarize readers with available resources and to promote recreational reading. Full advantage has been taken of the knowledge about how to promote ease of access to resource, how to encourage use of the library, and how to serve the reader efficiently ·at the lowest cost. Access to library re- sources has become one of the least ex- pensive services the academic library provides, and hours have been extended to 100 hours a week or more in many in- stances in recognition of this capabil- ity. SUMMARY This discussion of services to readers would not be complete without some as- sessment of what has been accomplished in the past century and some enumera- tion of current trends affecting academ- ic library service. . Expansion of the curriculum, the steady increase in enrollments, particu- 418 I College & Research Libraries • September 1976 larly at the graduate level,_ changes in in- st:ructional methods, and emphasis on research profoundly influenced academ- ic library development during these hundred years. The initial response to these new responsibilities was an empha- sis on collection development and the development of bibliographic tools. In the late 1930s and early 1940s the in- creasing information about reader be- havior began to influence service pol- icies and procedures. Academic librari- ans were more successful in developing congenial study environments than in discovering appropriate service patterns. So much attention was given to the "in- puts," the components of a library, that the products and services needed to sat- isfy reader requirements were not well understood. What appears to characterize the cur- rent stage of development · is the appli- cation of more rigorous methods of analysis of problems and a more critical assessment of various alternatives. We still face the need for a better under- standing of the library as an instrument of instruction and research and the definition of the most efficient and effec- tive way to meet readers' requirements. The area of services to readers reflects as well - as any aspect of . librarianship the application of -research in the more reasoned approach to the · definition of problems and the selection of alterna- tive solutions. Studies of the use of li- brary resources in an academic library, attempts to cost out library functions, the determination of the break -even point in the retention of journals, ARL studies of the cost of interlibrary loans, and alternative methods of satisfying demands are all examples of a more systematic effort to research academic li- brary problems.50-53 A review of the an- nual reports of the Council on Library Resources reveals the range of issues which have received ·systematic atten- th "'.J tion over the twenty-year life of at organization-one of the first such or- ganizations devoted · to the support of library research.54 · As ·the academic library begins a new century of service, we may anticipate a more critical · assessment of the library's role, a more coordinated effort with national leadership to provide the range of resources in a timely, efficient, and economical manner and a wider range of services to support instruction and research in the twenty-first century. REFERENCES 1. Edward G. Holley, "Academic Libraries in 1876," College & Research Libraries 37: 15-47 (Jan. 1976). 2. U.S. Department of Health, Education, and' Welfare, Digest of Education Statistics 1975 Edition (Washington, D.C.: Govt. Print. Off., 1976) , p.181. 3. Ibid., p.80. 4. Arthur E. Bestor, Jr., "The Transformation of American Scholarship, 1875-1917," Li- brary QuarterJy 23:164-79 (July 1953). 5. John S. Brubacher and Willis Rudy, High- er Education in Transition ( New York: Harper, 1958), p.82. 6. Holley, "Academic Libraries in 1876." 7. W. N. Chattin Carlton, "College Libraries in the Mid-nineteenth Century," Library Journal 32:479-86 (Nov. 1907) . 8. Brubacher and Rudy, Higher ·Education in · Transition. 9. Frederick Rudolph, The American College . and University ( New York: Knopf, 1965 ) . 10. Holley, ''Academic Libraries in 1876." 11. Carlton, "College Libraries in the Mid- nineteenth Century."- 12. George Alan Works, College and Univer- sity Library Problems: A Study of a Select- ed Group of Institutions Prepared for the .. Association of American Universities (Chi- cago: American Library Assn., 1927). 13. William J. Baumol and Matityahu Marcus, Economics of Aca~ic Libraries (Wash- ington, D;C.: American Council on Educa- tion, 1973). 14. Robert B. Downs, "Development of Re- search Collections in University Libraries," in The Library in the University (Ham- den, Conn.: Shoe String, 1967), p.64. 15. William M. Randall, The College Library (Chicago: American Library Assn. and Univ. of Chicago Pr., 1932), p.5. 16. Ibid., p.33. 17. Ibid., p.121-44. 18. William M. Randall and Francis L. D. Goodrich, Principles of College Library Ad- ministration ( Chicago: American Library Assn. and Univ. of Chicago Pr., 1936). 19. Paper prepared by Melville J. Ruggles, cited in Edward F. Turner, Jr., A Study of the Implications of Modern Technology for Small College Libraries ( Lexington, V a.: Washington and Lee Univ., 1969), p.20. 20. "Guidelines for Two-Year College Learn- ing Resources Programs," CoUege & Re- search Libraries News 33: 305-15 ( Dec. 1972). 21. "Standards for College Libraries," College & Research Libraries News 36:277-79 (Oct. 1975). 22. See, for example, Charles A. Cutter, Rules for a Printed Dictionary Catalogue (Wash- ington, D.C.: Govt. Print. Off., 1876), or Melvil Dewey, A Classification and Subject Index for Cataloguing and Arranging the Books and Pamphlets of a Library (Am- herst, Mass.: 1876). 23. In contrast to Cutter and Dewey, the de- velopment of the MARC II format by the Library of Congress has involved wide in- put from the library profession. 24: Samuel Rothstein, The Development of Reference Service through Academic Tra- dit·ions, Public Library Practice and Special Librarianship ( Chicago: Association of College and Reference Libraries, 1955). 25. Harvie Branscomb, Teaching with Books: A Study of College Libraries ( Chicago: Association of American Colleges, Amer- ican Library Assn., 1940 ), p.5-6. 26. Rothstein, The Development of Reference Services, p.31. 27. Ibid., p.32. 28. W. F. Poole, "The University Library and the University Curriculum," Library ]our- nal18:470-11 (Nov. 1893). 29. Rothstein, The Development of Reference Service, p.75-77. 30. Randall, The College Library, 3-4. Readers and Resources I 419 31. Branscomb, Teaching. with Books, ~. 32. B. Lamar Johnson, Vitalizing a CoUege Li- brary (Chicago: American Library Assn., 1939). 33. Patricia B. Knapp, The Monteith College Library Experiment (New York: Scare- crow, 1966). 34. Patricia B. Knapp, College Teaching and the College Library (Chicago: American Library Assn., 1959). 35. Lester Asheim, "A Survey of Recent Re- search," in Jacob M. Price, ed., Reading for Life: Developing the College Students' Lifetime Reading Interest (Ann Arbor: Univ. of Michigan Pr., 1959), p.3-26. 36. Rothstein, The Development of Reference Service, p.37. 37. Keyes D. Metcalf, "Departmental Organi- zation in Libraries," in Carleton B. Joeckel, ed., Current Issues in Library Administra- tion (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Pr., 1938 ), p.106. 38. Robert A. Miller, "Centralization versus Decentralization," ALA Bulletin 33:75-79 (1939). 39. Herman H. Fussier and Julian L. Simon, Patterns of Use of Books in Large Research Libraries (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Li- brary, 1961). 40. This planning was based in part on the finding in Mahmud Sheniti, "The Univer- sity Library and the Scholar; A Study of the Recorded Faculty Use of a Large Uni- versity Library" (Ph.D. dissertation, Grad- uate Library School, Univ. of Chicago, 1960). 41. Ralph E. Ellsworth, "Colorado University's Divisional Reading Room Plan: Descriptio~ and Evaluation," College & Research Li- braries 2:103-9, 192 (March 1941). 42. Irene A. Braden, The Undergraduate Lf- brary (Chicago: American Library Assn., 1970). 43. "Library Service to Undergraduates: A Symposium," College & Research Librar- ies 14:266-75 (July 1953). · 44. Rothstein, The Development of Reference Service, p.77. 45. Association of College and Reference Li- braries, Proceedings of the Library Build- ing Plans Institute (Chicago: American Li- brary Assn., 1952- ). 46. Cooperative Committee on Library Build- ing Plans, Planning the University Library Building, edited by J. E. Burchard, C. W. 420 I College & Research Libraries • September 1976 DaVid, and J. P. Boyd (Princeton: Univ. of Princeton Pr., 1949). 47. Ralph E. Ellsworth, Planning the College and University Library Building (Boulder, · Colo.: Pruett Pr., 1968). 48. Herman H. Fussier, Library Buildings for Library Service (Chicago: American Li- brary Assn., 1947). 49. Keyes D. Metcalf, Planning Academic and Research Library Buildings (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1965). 50. Fussier and Simon, Patterns of the Use of Books in Large Research Libraries. 51. Ferdinand F. Leimkuhler and Michael D. Cooper, Cost Accounting and Analysis for University Libraries (Berkeley: Univ. of California, 1970). 52. Gordon R Williams, ••Library Cost Models: Owning_ Versus Borrowing Serial Publica- -tions" (A Report to the Office of Science Information Service, National Science Foundation, 1968). 53. These studies are summarized in Stanley McElderry, "Toward a National Informa- tion System in the United States," Libri 25:199-212 (Sept. 1975). 54. Council on Library Resources, "Report" {Washington, D.C.: Council on Library Resources, Inc., 1955/57- ). Stanley McElderry is director, Joseph Regenstein Library, University of Chicago. .I j r' (.