College and Research Libraries To the Editor: The issue of March, 1970, carries an ar- ticle by Virgil F. Massman and Kelly Pat- terson, "A Minimum Budget for Current Acquisitions," with whose statement ("The standards outlined by ACRL 'Standards for College Libraries' are no standards at all") , the undersigned are in hearty agreement. We also subscribe to the premise on which this article rests, "An academic library's holdings can be determined only by the quantity and range of the materials being published which are relevant to the aca- d emic programs it is supporting, not by the traditional number-of-students criterion." We join with Miss Patterson and Mr. Massman in urging that ACRL face the FROM CHOICE 1967 Subject No. of Titles Cost General 56 $ 389.50 Humanities 57 352.15 Art 196 2,441.25 Lang. & Lit. 604 3,527.06 Music 56 508.82 Philosophy 105 636.24 Religion 189 982.53 Speech, Theater & Dance 100 666.20 Science 57 589 .90 Astronautics & Astronomy 26 165.50 Biology 124 1,183.61 Chemistry 65 794.45 Earth Science 30 334.00 Engineering 52 557.27 Health 29 201.40 Mathematics 80 706.70 Physics 74 678.45 Social & Behavioral Sciences 121 762 .90 Economics 244 1,854.49 Education 152 842.87 History, Geography & Travel 800 6,334.43 Political Science 248 1,478.89 Psychology 91 600.90 Sociology & Anthropology 131 885.01 TOTAL Average Cost $7.46 3,687 $27,505.72 410 1 Letters whole problem of establishing minimum standards for academic libraries. As a step toward assembling the neces- sary data for setting such standards, the au- thors describe a method for estimating the . . . "annual cost to an academic library of keeping up with worthwhile current pub- lications in various disciplines." This would be a useful figure , pertinent to any estab- lishment of reasonable standards. However, by their methods, the authors have gone around Robin Hood's barn while ignoring the Blue Bird of Happiness in our own ACRL backyard (i.e. Choice) . By totaling the cost of titles reviewed in 71 arbitrarily chosen journals, representing the diversity of disciplines in the liberal FROM CHOICE 1969 Subject N o. of T itles Cost General 24 $ 168.95 Humanities 54 396.95 Art 197 3,066.80 Lang. & Lit. 518 3,741.54 Music 58 545.40 Philosophy 81 628.70 Religion 164 1,178.35 Speech, Theater & Dance 104 858.80 Science 64 632.40 · Astronautics & Astronomy 54 571.65 Biology 172 1,775.75 Chemistry 103 1,179.09 Earth Science 63 746.05 Engineering 108 1,451.05 Health 86 596.40 Mathematics 107 1,022.80 Physics 97 1,247.60 Social & Behavioral Sciences 167 1,429.48 Economics 320 2,954.60 Education 208 1,317.25 History, Geography & Travel 898 8,377.56 Political Science 249 1,737.95 Psychology 113 838.05 Sociology & Anthropology 214 1,581.30 TOTAL Average Cost $9.03 4,223 $38,041.47 arts, a count of 3,195 titles costing $26,17·8.69 (average cost $8.19) was pro- duced for 1967. Believing that Choice could offer a less laborious way of achieving these figures , we did a total of titles recommended by Choice reviews for the calendar year 1967 and pro- duced the sum of 3,687 titles costing $27,505.72 (average cost $7.46). These figures seem close enough to those of the Patterson-Massman study to be useful. As another check, a similar total of Choice reviews for the calendar year 1969 produced 4,223 titles costing $38,041.47 (average cost $9.03 ) . The increase will sur- prise no one. To be useful, these figures , giving the cost of current publications, should be produced every year. We suggest that Choice pub- lish annually a tabulation of the number of titles recommended in each discipline and their cost. This would be one more use of the excellent evaluative work done b y Choice . If ACRL can implement the collecting of these annual figures , one segment of a minimum standard for an acquisition budg- et will have been produced. This however is only one segment and not the whole. Some way must be devised to produce figures for continuations. Patter- son and Massman estimate a minimum of $3,250. Our own experience is that this fig- ure should be tripled or quadrupled. Again, provision must be made for "popular" or browsing literature and other fringe areas. The largest segment untouched in this dis- cussion is serials, current and backrun. This is probably the most difficult of all to assess. We join with Miss Patterson and Mr. Massman in urging that ACRL face this whole problem of establishing minimum standards for academic libraries. Mrs. Margaret Garner, Associate Librarian and Mrs. Peggy A. Overfield Assoc. Librarian, Acquisitions The State University College Potsdam, N ew York To the Editor: I was surprised to see that Dr. Moham- med M. Aman, in his article entitled "Bibli- Letters I 411 ographical Services in the Arab Countries" (C&RL, July 1970) made no mention of the monthly Accessions List: Middle East, which has been issued since 1962 by the Library of Congress PL-480 Office in Cairo. Although it makes no claim to cover cur- rent book production throughout the Mid- dle East or the Arab world, it is generally recognized as the single most complete and most current listing of significant titles pub- lished in the United Arab Republic, the world's largest producer of Arabic books. Since Dr. Aman's paper seems to point to the need for an Arab bibliographical cen- ter, I should think that he would be inter- ested in the experience of the Library of Congress PL-480 Office in Cairo. Under the Higher Education Amendments of 1968, and with the necessary funding, this office or one similar to it but perhaps located else- where might well be able to achieve biblio- graphical coverage of the entire Arab world. Whether such a center could pro- vide all the services envisioned by Dr. Aman in his article is another matter. To the Editor: Donald F. Jay Chief of General Research Services The New York Public Library Mohammed M. Aman's article on Arab bibliographical services in your July issue was a useful introductory guide to what must be pretty much of a t erra incognita to many of your readers. What a pity, then, to let it be printed with so many errors and inconsistencies; surely we can expect metic- ulous attention to detail in an article on bibliography appearing in a journal of academic librarianship. Without correct accentuation, these words are not French: Algerie, generale, conserves, legale, annee, imprimes, preface; these phrases (quoted from the article) are non- sense: publications d' esposees, manuscripts arabes des Rabat, recapitulations d es peri- odique officiels. Not to capitalize Anmer- kungen is a small enough fault, but to mis- spell Litteratur as literature and Fliigel (a proper name) as Flugel is inexcusable. I don't remember seeing the Arabic let- ter ·ayn transliterated anywhere else as "; but granted that that is the preferred trans- 412/ College & Research Libraries • Novern,ber 1970 !iteration in College & Research Libraries, surely matbu•at (printed materials, books) could have been rendered only as matbu'' at and not also as matbu "at and matbu" at. Typographical error was not confined to foreign words and phrases. The citations in note 9, page 259, one in English and the other in Italian, are affected: "Geography, Dept. of Research Papers, series no. 1" should read "Geography, Dept. of. Re- search Papers series no. 1" even if only the punctuation is corrected; and "Anno 1-42" is a misprint for "Anno 1-4, no. *"· "July" for "luglio" on the next line is also incorrect. College & Research Libraries is, I sup- pose, a scholarly journal; perhaps some greater effort could be made to meet the formal standards of scholarship. Michael ]. Briggs African Studies Bibliographer The Memorial Library The University of Wisconsin CORRECTION NOTICE In Gilbert W. Fairholm's article "Es- sentials of Library Manpower Budget- ing," in the September 1970 issue of Col- lege & Research Libraries, the first three lines in the right column, page 337, should correctly read: "each class of library, i.e., I, agricultural and technical college; II, liberal arts col- lege; and III, university. These ad-"