College and Research Libraries eleven on maT'riage and the family,· and thirty-seven on astronomy and only thirty-five on psychology. The unit on reading · guidance includes background material on the importance of reading in college instruction, reports of selected studies in the field, and specific sug- gestions regarding what librarians and other faculty members can do to stimulate and guide student reading. The final section of the syllabus, The Col- lege Library as a Teaching Instrument, is divided into six parts, each of which includes a variety of suggested specific practices: The Library as an Extension of the In- structional Activities of the Classroom A Laboratory in which the Student Devel- ops the Ability to use Tools of Learning A Source of Information on Non-Academic Subjects A Reservoir of Knowledge An Aid in Helping Students Become Good Citizens in a Democracy Examples of Library-Faculty Relationships . To the best of this reviewer's knowledge, this volume represents a pioneer effort at publishing an actual course syllabus designed to highlight library-instructional relationships for college faculty members. The authors are to be commended, both for the validity of their concept and for the value of the ma- terials they have assembled.-B. . Lamar 1 ohnson, Stephens College. Government Publications Library Rewrds for Government Publications [by] Anne Ethelyn Markley. Berkeley and Los Angeles, University of California Press, 1951. vii, 66p., forms. $1.25. Lithoprint. So few contributions of significance have been made to the literature of the admini- stration of government documents collections that any addition to it is sure to be received with attentive interest by a wide audience of documents librarians and library administra- tors. They will find Miss Markley's work well worth consideration. According to the preface, it is "a revised and expanded version of a paper presented at the Institute on Government Publications held at Berkeley, California, October 26-28, 1950, under the sponsorship of the State Documents Committee of the California Li- brary Association, the University of Cali- fornia School of Librarianship, a·nd U niver- sity of California Extension." It discusses systems of classification and records for collections of government publica- tions in non-depository, selected depository, and complete depository libraries, recognizing that the essential requirements in these mat- ters vary according to the nature and size of the collection. The non-depository collection is disposed of briefly and sensibly with the assumption that the same arrangement and records as are used for the general collection of the library will be most efficient. For the depository libraries, the continuing controversy over segregating the documents collection as opposed to incorporating it into the general collection is briefly recognized, with reference to fuller treatment elsewhere. Segregation is recommended, on the ground that the printed lists and indexes available are best utilized under this arrangement. In the light of experience, this reviewer considers that Miss Markley is on th.e side of the angels.' Problems of classification are next consid- ered in more detail. At the outset, a basic ar- rangement by issuing office is assumed, with- out debate. It is the order of arrangement of the offices themselves that Miss Markley considers the chief problem, and her recom- mendation here is one of the most contro- versial points in the study. Instead of ar- rangement by major department, subdivided by subordinate agency, on the principles of the Superintendent of Documents classifica- tion system for federal government publica- tions, she advocates direct arrangement of agencies without regard to their place in the government hierarchy, in an alphabetical sub- ject arr.angement to be brought about by selecting a key word in the title of the agency that will indicate its subject specialization and if possible place it in juxtaposition to other kindred agencies. The example cited is the Navy's Bureau of Ordnance, the publi- cations of •which will file next to those of the Army's Ordnance Department. This is all very well, but let us consider another ex- ample. In the Department of Agriculture, there have been, at various times, the Agricul- 176 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES tural Marketing Administration, the Agricul- tural Marketing Service, the Foreign Mar- kets Division, the Marketing and Marketing Agreements Division, the Marketing Services Office, and the Surplus Marketing Admini- stration. Which of these shall have Market- ing as the entry word, and in which shall the preceding adjective be considered of primary significance? All these agencies deal with agricultural matters, but only the first two have any indication of that in their titles. Under direct entry, the subordinate functions of the Department of Agriculture will be scattered throughout the alphabet. I hold no brief for the Superintendent of Documents classification, and my objections are on record, but it seems to me ·that to abandon arrange- ment by major agency is likely to result in confusion worse confounded. The fact that under this system the entry word must in numerous cases be a matter of the classifier's choice is an added hazard, recognized indi- rectly in Miss Markley's comments on one of the notation systems she describes. In treating of the recording procedures to be followed , Miss Markley describes an "all- weather" file, devised by Dr. Raynard Swank, designed to include not only the customary bibliographical information, but to serve also as a serials control and binding record. Hav- ing observed such a file in use, I am led to the conclusion that it is better to specialize a bit, in records as in provisions for the weather. My observation has been that the time neces- sary to set up a separate checking file for currently and frequently received serials and a separate binding record is abundantly repaid in increased efficiency and time saved in lo- cating cards for the daily routines of entering new acquisitions, and in the specialized pro- cedures of binding. Space does not permit an adequate descrip- tion of the very fine bibliographies that con- clude this study, and add much to its value in any consideration of the difficult problems of organizing and servicing a collection of gov- ernment publications. Miss Markley states that her study is a synthesis of the opinions and practices recom- mended by numerous documents librarians. She has d