College and Research Libraries By J O H N H . RUSSEL The Library Self-Survey* Dr. Russel is associate professor of edu- cationUniversity of Denver. TH I S D I S C U S S I O N relating to the library self-survey will be confined to r a t h e r brief statements concerning the college survey movement, what we might con- sider the values of the self-study or self- survey, the ends to which such a study would be directed, and how it might be organized. I have tried to set these re- marks in a general philosophical frame- work so that I trust they may be h e l p f u l to you whether you serve in public or private college, with vocational or lib- eral arts interests. I n a sense, at least, the idea of the self- study is not new to a college library. For years, various kinds of statistics have been and are being gathered by you, as college librarians. These are, in a way, on-going tabulations and do not refer particularly to, although they may be a part of, a m a j o r self-study project. Such a project has a definite organiza- tion or plan, a well-defined beginning and end, in terms of time, and clearly defined goals or objectives. T h e idea of institutional surveys or studies is something relatively new in higher education. T h e product of the last 50 years, the institutional survey is said by Walter Eells to have h a d its be- ginning in 1908 with the Oberlin Study. T h e story of the survey—and later the self-evaluation movement—was succinct- ly summarized by C. Robert Pace last spring at the N i n t h A n n u a l Conference on Higher Education, sponsored by the Association for Higher Education of the * P a p e r presented at the m e e t i n g of the J u n i o r College Libraries Section, ACRL, Chicago, Febru- ary 1, 1955. National Education Association. M a j o r surveys, according to Pace, have been conducted among the church-related col- leges, public institutions of higher edu- cation in various states, culminating in the report of the President's Commission in 1947. Four significant evaluation proj- ects, emphasizing both measurement and philosophy, conducted in recent years, are the Eight Year Study, the Coopera- tive College Study, the Commission on Teacher Education, and the Coopera- tive Study of Evaluation in General Education. Many colleges, as you prob- ably know, have conducted intensive self-studies in the last 20 years; this par- ticular movement has h a d quite recent support a n d financial incentive in se- lected institutions from the F u n d for the Advancement of Education of the Ford Foundation. R a t h e r intensive evaluation of an in- stitution has, for approximately 20 years, been a vital part of the accrediting pro- cedures of the Commission on Colleges and Universities of the N o r t h Central Association. Some three years ago these procedures were extended to include an institutional self-survey required of in- stitutions prior to their application for membership in the Association. Institu- tional surveys in this connection have, of course, included the survey of the college library. T h e N o r t h Central As- sociation as a result of its study of cri- teria in the early 1930's has used the following items as significant indicators of library and, in turn, institutional excellence: reference and periodical holdings, amounts spent for books and library salaries, student and faculty use, and budgetary procedures. Objective data are used today only on the items MARCH, 1956 127 of expenditures for books a n d periodi- cals a n d library salaries. T h e college library in N o r t h Central accrediting pro- cedures is today evaluated, in some meas- ures subjectively, w i t h i n the general framework of the extent and m a n n e r in which the library tends to implement the general purposes or objectives of the institution of which it is an integral part. My own experience with the library self-survey has come largely as a N o r t h Central examiner. I n that role I have not actually been a participant b u t r a t h e r an onlooker or observer. Several years ago, in that well-known educational research project, the Eight- Year Study, R a l p h Tyler, who was then chairman of the D e p a r t m e n t of Educa- tion of the University of Chicago, listed what he considered as the m a j o r pur- poses of evaluation of student achieve- ment. W h i l e his statement is directed toward one particular type of evalua- tion, it would appear that several of these purposes are just as pertinent to the broader, more general, area of insti- tutional evaluation, or institutional self- evaluation. His statements would per- tain with equal facility to that more spe- cialized area of the college, that is, the college library, or to the library self- study, the problem which is o u r central concern today. T h e first such purpose is that evalua- tion is a check on the effectiveness of the educational institution or, in our particular interest, a check on the effec- tiveness of the library as an integral part of the total educational institution. Such a continuing kind of examination can show points of effective operation and other points where some changes can materially improve the operation of the library. Another purpose of evaluation is that it can give a certain psychological se- curity, both to the faculty of the college and to the library staff. U n d o u b t e d l y a college faculty and a library staff have a continuing concern, beset with many doubts, as to whether the m a j o r objec- tives of the institution are being real- ized. A library self-study can provide this k i n d of assurance not only to the library staff b u t also to the college fac- ulty in those areas especially where the library functions as the so-called labora- tory of the curriculum and instructional program. Such evaluation procedure can give such assurances to a library staff that there can, in turn, be less need for reliance on extraneous concerns, such as book counting, nose counting, etc. One additional purpose of the library self-study is that it will give a sound basis for public relations. Here is a means of providing information for tax- payers, boards of trustees, alumni, pros- pective students. N o t only can the strengths of the library be clearly and forcefully portrayed for the edification of potentially interested groups, but also the particular needs of the library, as shown by sound and careful study, can be identified and publicized at the propitious time a n d place. O n e final purpose is that the evalua- tive process forces the library staff to give serious thought and real considera- tion to the reasons for the existence of the library itself. It will tend then to help bring those purposes clearly into line with the over-all objectives of the institution of which it is a part. I n brief, then, a library self-study may be a wise move for several important reasons. W e have suggested that it can provide a check of the effectiveness of the library; it can provide a kind of psychological security for the library staff a n d for the college faculty; it can provide a valuable instrument in public relations for the library; a n d it can force the library staff to formulate clear- ly the objectives of the library itself. If it appears now that there is value to be received f r o m a self-study, the next a n d really i m p o r t a n t question is, " H o w does one go about it?" It would seem to me that there are some definite, clear- 128 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES cut lines that a self-survey must take. W h e n and if they are not followed, we end u p with only busy work on the part of the librarian and his staff. Certainly in some, if not many, insti- tutions h a r d thinking has gone into the discussion of the total objectives of the institution. Where this j o b has been done and done adequately the library self-survey can proceed to the second step. W h e r e the first step has not been done adequately, or has not been done at all, time must be taken to formulate through faculty action a clear-cut state- ment of the over-all purposes of the col- lege itself. T h e second step, a n d one which I hope is quite obvious, is the need for well-defined purposes for the library it- self. It is possible, b u t I am sure quite unlikely, that the college library does what it is doing or thinks it is doing, only because it always has done just that. Or more unlikely still, the library does what it does because some librarian has known other libraries which have done just that, or were thought to be doing just that. T h e college library has no raison d'etre apart f r o m the college of which it is a vital part. It is obvious that the "why and wherefore" of the college library should not be taken light- ly. Clearly stated objectives should cer- tainly be formulated by the librarian; these in t u r n need the support a n d en- dorsement of the faculty and administra- tion of the college. T h e r e are many instances on record of objectives which have been set by a n d for college libraries. Many years ago R a n d a l l a n d Goodrich, as you know, formulated f o u r central functions of the library as they concern the use of books. These are: (1) to f u r n i s h the books re- quired for collateral reading in connec- tion with the courses offered, together with related material, including mate- rial required by the faculty members' needs for instructional purposes; (2) to furnish books for voluntary reading by students and to promote their use; (3) to provide a comprehensive selection of authoritative books covering all fields of knowledge, and to make their content easily accessible; and (4) to train stu- dents in the use of library materials and to integrate the library with the instruc- tional program. Many of you are aware of the pur- poses of the library as prepared by your own J u n i o r College Libraries Section of the American Library Association. I n this particular statement we read, " T h e jun- ior college should provide, or have easi- ly available, library facilities adequate to meet the requirements of the institu- tion's program. T h e library derives its responsibilities f r o m the purposes of the college it serves a n d should include the following functions." As the first func- tion we note the statement, "as a ma- terials center," with the following infor- mation that books and other library ma- terials to meet the needs and interests of students and faculty must be selected, ordered, cataloged, maintained, and serviced; as a distribution agency the library should be easily accessible to stu- dents and faculty; information concern- ing new materials should be given periodically and frequently to students, faculty, and administrators; occupation- al and vocational guidance materials must be available for students' use and to supplement the work of counselors. T h e second main f u n c t i o n is "as a teach- ing agency" with the understanding that instruction in the use of books in li- braries must be given to classes a n d in- dividuals for training student library assistants; cooperation with faculty members in the preparation of teaching materials and bibliographies must be given for developing a n d improving the curricula; reference aid to individuals should be given. A third f u n c t i o n listed in the j u n i o r college set of standards is that the junior college library should serve "as a reading center." T h i s refers to reading materials to be made availa- MARCH, 1956 129 ble beyond the needs of the instruction- al program. I n this instance reading ma- terials would be available for cultural advancement, for reading guidance, a n d for encouraging the development of broad and desirable reading interests of all its clientele. As a reading center the library would provide a section for pro- fessional books and reading materials for the college faculty. I n the situation of a "community college" the services of the college library might well be ex- tended to meet the needs of people in the town. T h e r e is no d o u b t that the purposes of the college library have been fully explored by many of you in many ses- sions of this kind. W e are concerned at this point only with the fact that it is absolutely necessary that these objectives be clearly and accurately stated for each particular college library. T h i s is step two of the self-survey procedure and it is impossible to move on with the self- survey u n t i l this particular question has been clearly faced. It is of very real im- portance, since the self-survey of the col- lege library must be focused directly o n the objectives of the particular library involved. These in a sense become defi- nite goals which in t u r n are to be meas- ured by the self-study procedure. It would be proper also for the self- survey to be directed to some extent to- ward the specific standards which li- brarians have set for themselves and for their libraries. It seems to me, however, that there is a very real danger in this kind of situation, since in a sense these standards are symbols of excellence rath- er than excellence itself. These stand- ards in themselves are not the objectives or goals of the library, b u t they are rather the actual means or conditions which various librarians a n d college staffs have set for the achievement of the college and library goals. O n e can imagine the perhaps unlikely possibility of a situation in which all of the library standards are being fully and well met, b u t on the other h a n d the situation of a very mediocre j o b being performed in terms of actual library service. Profes- sional degrees, a m o u n t of reading space, lighting, circulation figures, faculty r a n k i n g are indicators of library excel- lence, b u t they are not ends w i t h i n themselves, not the purposes for which the library has been created or for which it continues to exist. T h u s I would urge that the library self-study be clearly a n d specifically organized in terms of the chief purposes, the central objectives, of the college library itself. T h e r e are doubtless some very obvious ways to measure the actual achievement of the m a j o r objectives of the college library. In the sense that the library is to provide collateral or extended reading for the courses offered in the college curriculum, it is possible to check li- brary holdings against certain lists of basic holdings prepared by experts in various subject matter fields. A thor- ough study of the extent of student and faculty withdrawals, and other meas- ures of student and faculty use of these particular materials, will provide a sec- ond check. A third check might well be implemented by selected faculty mem- bers in order to determine the actual use which students make of these vari- ous materials. T h e r e are certainly many kinds of library projects which can be designed by faculty members in certain courses to do this job. Another type of investigation relating to this particular objective can involve the use of faculty opinion relating particularly to the ef- fectiveness of the college library. An opinion poll of students might also be very productive and helpful. These sug- gestions are not thought of as complete a n d in some sense they may sound per- haps a bit naive to the experienced trained librarian. T h e y do emphasize, I hope, the idea that the library purposes themselves are subject to direct a n d pen- etrating evaluation. It is certainly pos- sible to devise ways and means to evalu- 130 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES ate all of the various functions which have been set for any particular college library. Finally, the question of who is to do the j o b of the self-study is before us. Certainly the continuing or on-going type of self-survey might very well be made, and perhaps is being made, by the librarian a n d his staff. O n the other hand, since the college library is an in- tegral part of the college, the more ex- tensive initial survey might well be made by a special faculty committee on which the librarian would serve as a member. A survey undertaken u n d e r such aus- pices will have all the advantages of being in every way quite objective; the resulting report will thus have faculty endorsement a n d support. W h e t h e r we speak of the continuing type of self- study or of what we might call the sin- gle type of self-survey, there is no d o u b t that the real work—the gathering of statistics, the preparation of question- naires, the various kinds of analyses, etc. —will all fall to the librarian. It is especially important, as I men- tioned earlier, that the purposes of the self-survey itself be clearly defined. Spe- cific and valid reasons for doing the job must be decided u p o n . T h e r e should also be a definitely determined schedule arranged and a date set for concluding the survey. T h e general plan for the survey and how it is to be conducted are problems to be worked out in each individual in- stitution. T h e r e are no d o u b t good and sufficient reasons for regular and con- tinuing self-studies of the college library. Certainly, a very real satisfaction can surely come either in learning that one's j o b is being well done or in learning what steps must be taken to bring about such a U t o p i a n situation. T h e experi- ence of doing a library self-study can be both informational and inspirational. About five h u n d r e d years ago Erasmus wrote these words to a friend, "I know how busy you are in your library." I would hope that this thought will not serve as your rationalization for not con- sidering and launching a library self- survey. Rather, I trust that this thought actually indicates that you, busy as you are today, are the kinds of persons for whom the self-survey has very real mean- ing and significance. ACRL Building Institute in Atlanta A college library building institute will be held at the Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, on J u n e 14-16 u n d e r the auspices of the A C R L Buildings Committee. One day will be devoted to critical discussion of library plans; another day will be given over to papers by leading architects, engineers and decorators on materials and equipment for library buildings. Library tours in the Atlanta area will be scheduled on Saturday, J u n e 16. For f u r t h e r informa- tion and for program of topics and speakers (when available) write to Dorothy M. Crosland, Director, Georgia Institute of Technology Libraries, Atlanta, Georgia. Mrs. Crosland is chairman of the A C R L Buildings Committee. MARCH, 1956 131