College and Research Libraries


B y W I L L I A M H . C A R L S O N 

History and Present Status of the 
Centralization of the Libraries of 
the Oregon State System of 
Higher Education 

Mr. Carlson is director of libraries, 
Oregon State System of Higher Education. 

WHEN the State-supported institutions of higher education in Oregon 
were centralized in 1 9 3 1 under the direc-
tion of a single chancellor there was also 
set up, as a part of that centralization, an 
administrative unification of all the libraries 
of the several institutions. T h i s library 
centralization, largely conceived by Cor-
neila M a r v i n Pierce, then Oregon State 
librarian and a member of the first central-
ized State B o a r d of Higher Education, was 
made an integral part of the Administrative 
Code set up and adopted by the Board. 

Because this was the first time that any 
State had undertaken to u n i f y the libraries 
of its State-supported higher institutions of 
education, the unification naturally at-
tracted a good deal of attention among 
students of library administration and 
among many practicing librarians too. O n e 
reflection of this interest is the M a s t e r ' s 
thesis prepared at the G r a d u a t e L i b r a r y 
School of the University of Chicago by 
M i l d r e d H a w k s w o r t h L o w e l l , formerly 
librarian of Eastern Oregon College of 
Education. M r s . L o w e l l ' s thesis, published 
by the Oregon State System of H i g h e r 
Education in 1 9 4 2 , w a s devoted to the uni-
fication of libraries everywhere but devoted 

major attention to the Oregon libraries 
and the Oregon centralization. T h i s thesis 
was accurately documented and presented 
the Oregon unification exactly as consti-
tuted by the Board in its Administrative 
Code. T h e unification of the libraries has 
not, however, f r o m the beginning, func-
tioned as set up on paper. T h e fact that the 
centralization of the libraries has differed so 
extensively in practice from the centraliza-
tion as stipulated by the Board has quite 
understandably created some misunder-
standing in library circles. F o r this reason, 
this brief explanation of how the centraliza-
tion has evolved and is now functioning is 
presented: 

Salient features of the unification of the 
libraries, as set up in 1 9 3 1 , w e r e : 

1. A director of libraries (also to serve as 
librarian of the State College at Cor-
vallis) to be responsible for the policies 
and organization of the division of serv-
ice, staff personnel, library instruction, 
preparation of the budget, and allocation 
of funds on the approval of the adminis-
trators of the several institutions. 

2. A librarian on each campus working 
under the director. 

3. A free circulating book stock, including 
the transfer of books between institu-
tions as required, upon authorization of 
the direct<?r, in consultation with librari-
ans and deans of the schools concerned. 

4. A common book fund to be allocated by 

414 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES 



the director and approved by the various 
presidents. 

5. Centralization of the ordering and cata-
loging of all materials acquired. 

6. Instruction in the use of the library on 
each campus and the appointment of a 
system supervisor of library instruction. 

Several features of this unification have 
never been carried out as originally planned 
by the Board. A t no time has the director 
prepared budgets and allocated funds to the 
various libraries, nor directed the w o r k of 
the head librarians in anything but an 
advisory w a y , nor established or attempted 
to establish a common book fund for the 
allocation to the various libraries as specified 
by the Board's Administrative Code. 
Neither has the freely circulating book 
stock, including transfer of books between 
the institutions, as required, worked out in 
practice. One attemDt to achieve such a 
transfer of books was not successful and 
constituted a considerable source of irrita-
tion between the two major institutions for 
a considerable period of years. Neither 
was instruction in the use of the library on 
each campus ever undertaken under the 
supervision of the director of libraries. 

T h e centralization of the ordering (but 
not the cataloging) of books has been 
carried out but not to the degree and com-
plete extent envisaged in the original Board 
directive. 

T h e Central L i b r a r y Office was estab-
lished in the State College L i b r a r y in 
Corvallis with a small central staff. A first 
step in the centralization, was, of course, 
the creation, in the Central L i b r a r y office, 
of a complete author union catalog of all 
the books in the system libraries. F o r a 
time some members of the University of 
Oregon O r d e r Department at Eugene were 
assigned to the Corvallis office. It soon 
became apparent that the volume and 
degree of ordering carried out by the U n i -
versity L i b r a r y was too extensive to be satis-

factorily handled in a branch office some 
f o r t y miles distant. A l l order w o r k as it 
pertained to the University L i b r a r y was 
therefore, at an early date, returned to the 
Eugene campus. T h e Central L i b r a r y 
office did, however, continue to handle the 
complete order process f o r the College of 
Education Libraries. T h i s centralized 
ordering, as w e l l as centralized bookkeeping 
f o r all the libraries of the system has, 
throughout the years, been carried f o r w a r d 
with signal success. 

In effect, the unification of the Oregon 
libraries has differentiated more and more 
in practice from the unification as originally 
set up by the Board. T h e evolution has 
been definitely toward a group of autono-
mous libraries with the director of libraries 
serving more in an advisory and coordi-
nating capacity f o r all the library affairs of 
the system, rather than as the central 
administrative office specified by the Board 
in 1 9 3 1 . 

In recognition of the fact that the Ore-
gon unification has never functioned as set 
up on paper, the librarians of the system 
have undertaken, on their own initiative, a 
revision of the Code statement placing it in 
harmony with the actual functioning of the 
centralization as it has evolved over the 
years. T h i s revision was made by the L i -
brary Council of the system, an agency set 
up in the late 1 9 3 0 ' s as an informational 
and policy group of the combined libraries. 
A s is to be expected, the revision undertaken 
in the f a l l of 1 9 5 0 was not achieved with-
out extensive and spirited discussion. T h e 
revised statement, as agreed upon in the 
Council, was referred to the Chancellor in 
the spring of 1 9 5 1 . I t w a s approved by 
him and is now a part of the official admin-
istrative Code of the State Board of Higher 
Education. T h e revision, as w i l l be noted 
in the d r a f t set forth below, relieves the 
director of libraries of all direct administra-

OCTOBER, 1953 
40 7 



tive responsibility f o r the operation of 
various libraries of the system, a responsi-
bility which, in effect, he never exercised. 
It? does retain the director, in a vital and 
important sense, as a coordinating and in-
tegrating officer and advisor to the Chan-
cellor, in all matters pertaining to the 
libraries. 

Libraries 

a. It is the intent of the Board to maintain 
a closely coordinated and integrated 
system of autonomous libraries through 
which unnecessary duplication in ma-
terials, services, and procedures will be 
avoided and the library facilities and 
resources of the entire system will be 
readily available to all faculty members 
and students of the institutions under 
the control of the Board. Coordination 
of system-wide library development, 
processes and services will be achieved 
through: 
( 1 ) A chief librarian at each institution 

who, while, working in close co-
operation with the other libraries 
of the system and the Central 
Library Office, shall be directly 
responsible to his institutional 
executive officer for all phases of 
operation of the institutional library 
or libraries. 

( 2 ) A director of libraries who will 
also serve as chief librarian of one 
of the institutional libraries. It 
shall be his duty to administer the 
work of the Central Library 
Office; to be alert to the avoidance 
of unnecessary duplication among 
the libraries, either in resources or 
services; to coordinate and integrate 
the development and work of the 
libraries wherever possible; to 
direct the work and deliberations 
of the Library Council; to make 
biennial reports on the develop-
ment, operation and problems of 
the libraries to the Chancellor, and 
such annual and special reports as 
may, from time to time be required; 
to maintain and cumulate, monthly 
and annually, statistics for the 

libraries; to serve as an adviser to 
all chief librarians in the system 
and to the institutional executive 
officers whenever they may so de-
sire; and to advise and counsel the 
Chancellor on all system-wide prob-
lems and undertakings touching 
the operation of the libraries. 

( 3 ) A Central Library Office, adminis-
tered by the director of libraries. 
T h e function of this office will in-
clude: 
( a ) Responsibility for the central-

ized ordering of books for 
the three colleges of educa-
tion and the General Extension 
Division, and for the other 
libraries at whatever times 
such centralization should be 
advantageous for them. 

(b) Maintenance of centralized 
bookkeeping records for all 
the libraries of the system, 
furnishing each library, as 
frequently as it may require, 
a statement of its disburse-
ments and financial status. 

(c) Pooling of orders for all sup-
plies and equipment, such as 
catalog cards, business forms 
and furniture on which quan-
tity discounts may be obtained. 

(d) Maintenance, in the Central 
Library Office, of a union 
author catalog of all books in 
the system libraries. Corol-
lary to this an author catalog 
of all books in the State Col-
lege Library will be main-
tained at the University 
Library and an author catalog 
of all books of medical interest 
in the State College and Uni-
versity Libraries will be 
maintained at the Medical 
School Library. 

J (4) A Library Council consisting of the 
Chancellor, the chief librarian of 
each institution, and the head order 
librarian of each institution, and 
the head order librarian of the 
Central Library Office. T h i s 
Council will meet periodically to 
discuss problems of mutual concern 

416 • COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES 



and interest, and to develop plans 
f o r a free inter-lending of books 
among their respective institutions, 
and avoidance of unnecessary dupli-
cation. 

b. T h e Board, in its original directive for 
centralization of library resources and 
services, adopted in 1 9 3 1 , set forth 'an 
ideal for a great common supply of books 
and other printed materials.' This ideal 
will continuously be the guide of the 
Central Library Office, the director of 
libraries, the chief librarians, and the 
Library Council. 

T h e librarians of the Oregon State Sys-
tem of Higher Education take pleasure in 

having been able to achieve, in a spirit of 
friendship and mutual understanding, the 
complete revision of the Code set forth 
above. I t is hoped that the revision, as here 
presented, w i l l c l a r i f y the present status of 
the Oregon centralization and that this 
clarification w i l l be of interest and value to 
library administrators as an indication of 
the evolution of the first notable effort of 
any state to coordinate, integrate, and cen-
tralize the development and operations of 
libraries of its State-supported institutions 
of Higher Education. 

Progress Report on Activities of the Joint Committee 
on Library Education 

T h e Joint Committee on Library Education of the Council of National Library Associations 
met at the International House, University of Chicago, on April 4, 1953. Representatives of 
eight library associations, five members at large, and four observers were present at the meet-
ing. M r s . Eileen R. Cunningham, librarian, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, pre-
sided. 

Edward N . Waters, chairman of the Subcommittee on Special Library Education, reported 
on the meeting held the preceding day at the International House and presented plans for 
publication of the studies dealing with suggested curricula in seven subject fields. Melvin J . 
Voigt is the editor. Members of the Joint Committee hope these reports will be used as a 
guide by a few library schools where a combination of circumstances makes it possible to plan 
adequately for training librarians in any one of these subject areas. Subsequent to publication 
of the outlines of curricula, the Subcommittee studies may be expanded to other fields not 
heretofore considered in detail. 

At the request of the chairman, J a c k Dalton outlined the present status of the accreditation 
program for library schools, emphasizing the events leading up to, and subsequent to, the 
issuance of Program Letter Number one from the National Commission on Accreditation. 
Unfortunately this letter went out twelve days after the f a l l meeting of the Joint Committee 
in Washington on October 25, 1952. The members, after hearing M r . Dalton's report, com-
mended the A L A Board of Education for Librarianship on their efficient handling of the situa-
tion and expressed their continued desire for the Joint Committee to support the Board and 
other interested groups in a firm accreditation program. 

D r . Maurice F . Tauber submitted a progress report of the Subcommittee on Examinations. 
Information concerning procedures in sixteen states indicated that no particular pattern as to 
content and form is followed. On the basis of replies received it was evident many state agencies 
were interested in receiving advice and aid in clarifying thir examination programs. It was 
the consensus of those present that further study of the problem should be referred to the 
Board of Education for Librarianship. 

Dr. Frances Henne, in her report on program planning, suggested that the Joint Committee 
could serve as an informational and liaison center in educational matters for the various 
library groups which compose the C N L A and that each member should report at each meeting 
what his association is doing or would like to have done. In accordance with Resolution 2 of 
the Princeton Conference on Library Education, these reports would be submitted for publica-
tion in the AALS Newsletter.—Irene M. Strieby. 

OCTOBER, 1953 
40 7