College and Research Libraries


E D W A R D B . M c L E A N 

Shared Mobile Library Collections 

The use of bookmobiles is proposed for sharing special book collections 
among cooperating libraries. The advantages of such an arrangement 
over freighting joint-use collections from institution to institution in-
clude: (1) effort involved in packing, shipping, and receiving can be 
saved; (2) wear and tear on the books resulting from shipment can be 
reduced; and (3) mobile units can be considered supplemental library 
floor space. 

I T IS W E L L KNOWN that one of the most 
pressing problems in almost every col-
lege is library acquisitions. Compound-
ing this problem is the fact that the need 
for additional acquisitions has been made 
more compelling due to increased publi-
cation, new dimensions of research and 
the need to add even more courses to 
college programs dealing with new areas 
of study such as the Far East and Latin 
America. 

Colleges have responded to this criti-
cal situation by developing various 
methods for the cooperative acquisition 
and use of library materials. One ad-
ditional type of academic cooperation 
which seems to be both apparent and 
desirable is the use of mobile library 
units which could be transported be-
tween two or more institutions. 

Standard mobile units, such as those 
currently in use in many public library 
systems, are as large as 10' x 35'; the 
cost of these units, including shelving, 
lighting, air-conditioning, and heating, 
is approximately $7,500 to $8,000. It is 
possible, of course, to employ custom 
trailer construction which would allow 
for even larger units. For example, ex-

The author is Associate Professor of Po-
litical Science in Florida Presbyterian Col-
lege, St. Petersburg. 

pandable units which have a maximum 
size of 20' x 35' are available. Also, two 
of them can be joined together on a lo-
cation providing a total space of 20' x 
70'. Additional custom features can pro-
vide space for such items as microfilm 
readers and storage. 

It would not be advisable, it seems, to 
attempt to utilize such mobile holdings 
for introductory level courses, or courses 
which are offered at cooperating institu-
tions each semester of each year. Great 
economy and utility for cooperating in-
stitutions could result, however, in using 
them for courses offered in alternate se-
mesters or alternate years. In order to 
illustrate in what way these mobile units 
could be used by cooperating colleges 
let us assume that colleges A and B de-
cide to offer Chinese history. This would 
be a two-semester sequence course of-
fered in alternate years. The two insti-
tutions would agree to offer them in dif-
ferent years; thus, College A would offer 
it in the academic year 1967-1968, and 
College B in 1968-1969. In order to pro-
vide the maximum holdings to support 
and supplement the teaching of the fac-
ulty and the learning of the student, the 
jointly held collection would be placed 
in a mobile unit, which would be housed 
on the campus where the course was 
being offered for both semesters. The 

/ 27 



28 / College <6- Research Libraries • January 1968 

collection, housed in this unit would be 
cataloged in the mobile unit, as well as 
in the catalogs of both institutions. These 
mobile units, when they are resident on 
a campus could be used in a variety of 
ways as a supplement for that college's 
existing library facilities. The following 
four methods of use are suggested. 

First, the mobile unit could be placed 
adjacent to the main library. This collec-
tion could be made available for a lim-
ited number of hours each day, since it 
would be unlikely that the materials 
would be used by any student or faculty 
other than those involved in the course. 
Thus, limited availability, for purposes 
of checking out and returning materials 
would seem acceptable. Also, this would 
not involve extensive demands on use of 
library personnel to staff this mobile 
unit, for only one library assistant would 
be needed for the hours this unit was 
open. 

Second, in order to assure access to 
this collection on the same basis as other 
library holdings and in order not to re-
quire additional library personnel to staff 
the mobile unit on such a basis, the co-
operating schools could arrange to have 
this unit joined physically to their ex-
isting libraries. Minor alterations could 
be made on one of the exterior walls of 
the stack which would allow the door 
of the mobile unit to be opened into the 
stack area. The provision of such a point 
of access would seem to involve very 
little construction. If there were at least 
two continually rotating collections so 
that each campus would have one of 
them resident on its campus every year, 
such an arrangement would be very de-
sirable. Consequently access to the col-
lection would be on the same basis as 
access to other stack holdings, and all 
checking in and out of materials would 
be done at the main desk of the library. 

Third, the shelving on which the col-
lection was housed in the mobile unit, 
could itself be movable so that the col-

lection could be wheeled into the main 
library's regular stack section. In this 
instance, it would seem quite practical 
for the college involved to use this va-
cated unit as an additional'-foorm- TOI*-
classes or seminars, or for ^TSclditior̂ l 
study space lost to the library by virtue 
of their needing space in which to locate 
this unit's collection. This seems less de-
sirable, since it seems eminently more 
practical to use the collection in the 
mobile unit. 

Fourth, the collection in the mobile 
unit could be considered a branch li-
brary and could be housed adjacent to 
the buildings in which the appropriate 
department was located. The depart-
ment or division could, therefore, share 
the costs with the main library for staff-
ing the unit and paying the overhead 
costs involved. 

Some of the benefits proposed in this 
suggestion duplicate the benefits in-
volved for colleges with shared bloc 
holdings which can be transported by 
simple freight transfers, mainly in terms 
of reduced cost of acquisition. It seems 
that there are three major additional 
benefits, however, which accrue from 
this suggestion which make it more de-
sirable than freight transfers. 

First, library staffs would not be faced 
with the necessity of packing, invoicing, 
and shipping a bloc collection at the 
end of any term, or for receiving, inven-
torying, and shelving such a collection. 
This seems to be an inordinate demand 
of time, energy, and involvement on al-
ready overworked library staffs. 

Second, the collection would not be 
subjected to the wear and tear resulting 
from the continual packing and repack-
ing involved in transporting bloc collec-
tions by freight. Indeed, in this mobile 
unit, these collections would be very 
similar to parts of the permanent collec-
tion of the library. 

Third, the use of the mobile unit 
would be economical for the cooperating 



Shared Mobile Library Collections / 29 

colleges not only in terms of the cost 
of the collections, but it would also re-
duce considerably the cost involved for 
constructing space in which to house 
this collection. Further, the space con-
structed to house a collection which is 
to be moved by freight is vacant when 
this collection is moved, and, even 
though it might be utilized for study 

areas, it is a costly way to provide such 
an area. 

These then are the additional benefits 
that would seem to result from the use of 
mobile units. Most important, however is 
the fact that it provides colleges with a 
cheaper method of acquiring and hous-
ing collections which are needed in areas 
of study. ••