College and Research Libraries 420 I College & Research Libraries • September 1975 at the conference, their preservation in this volume is less valuable. Of more lasting interest are papers which probe· to the underlying issues. Jean L. Connor clearly identifies ten factors of net- work success, while Michael M. Reynolds explores similar issues, but gets lost in wordiness: Efforts to promote cooperation should con- tinue because of the social value for li- braries, regardless of the operant facts, since the consequences of the idea of co- operation not being present will be det- rimental to the library as an institution and as an organization, and will inhibit the possibilities for developing other al- ternatives to achieve professionally de- sirable goals-goals which frequently do not lend themselves easily to operational definitions. ( p.51) Wallace Olsen and Hugh Atkinson pro- vide perceptive papers on constraints in- fluencing network development. As Atkin- son states: "Constraints are not to be con- strued as reasons to avoid networks, but really parameters within which networks exist." (p.57) Paxton Price looks at some state plans re- lating to networks, and Gordon Williams examines national plans. Williams proceeds beyond . descriptions to critically examine the assumptions in network planning. Finally, Glyn T. Evans, charged with discussing "Networks: The Future," es- chews more of the blue-sky and instead focuses on the prime and more difficult question: What do we want to become? Both publications reflect quick and in- adequately edited transcripts from tapes: a reference to "Urbana-Champagne" (p.30) in the CATV volume, and a citation in the "Networks" report to a paper by Donald Urquhart, director of the National Lending Library in Great Britian, "A National Loan Policy for Syrians" (p.80). Both reports contain some worthwhile and perceptive papers, and provide useful overviews of topics of current interest.- John W. Aubry, Coordinator of Library Systems, Five Associated University Librar- ies, Syracuse, New York. Wilson , T. D., and Marsterson, W. A. J. Local Library Cooperation: Final Re- port on a Project Funded by the De- partment of Educa.~ & Science. ( Oc .. ·casional Publications Series No. 4) Shef- field: University of Sheffield, Postgradu- ate School of Librarianship and Informa- tion Science, 1974. 2 vol. (v.1: 223p. [text]; v.2: 3 microfiche [additional ta- bles and exhibits]) £3.50 (ISBN 0- 903522-01-2) Wilson and Marsterson, with a grant from the British government's Department of Education and Science, explored cooper- ative projects whereby six Sheffield libraries might increase the availability of their li- brary resources to user groups in higher ed- ucation. The study included libraries of the university, ·the polytechnic, the city, the University Institute of Education, the City College of Education, and the Totley/ Thornbridge College of Education. The principal report is printed in volume one. Volume two consists of three micro- fiche inserted in a pocket inside the back cover of volume one. Over 100 statistical tables and charts compare such variants as resources, expenditures, users,, services, and staff. The rep01t is numbered and subnum- bered for easy reference, although scarcely for smooth reading. Nevertheless, the au- thors occasionally included unrelated in- formation in a paragraph; for example, on page 75 in paragraph 5.5 headed "Cata- loguing and Classification" the last two sen- tences deal with charging systems. The authors found library cooperation in Sheffield rather limited. The study sug- gested improved communication links both between librarians and between librarians and patrons in regard to the resources avail- able in the Sheffield libraries. The authors recommended a more in-depth study of a cooperative transport system to facilitate interlibrary loan service; a complete union list of periodicals; coordination of nonbook resources; cooperative cataloging and ac- quisitions systems; and cooperative pur- chase and use of computer data bases. Two suggestions beg implementation-including patrons of other libraries in the orientation program of each library and providing fa- miliarization training sessions for staff mem- bers at other libraries. This study should be read by librarians interested in either cooperative library proj- ects or in library ·surveys. The survey in- struments are excellent, have been tested, and could be easily adapted to fit other locales. In courses on library organization patterns, the comparative descriptions of the internal library organization of each li- brary and the relationships between the li- braries in Sheffield should prove of inter- est. The somewhat pensive recognition by the authors that the impetus for cooperation must come from above will hopefully moti- vate chief librarians to exercise a leader- ship role in developing the appropriate Weltanschauung among their professional staff for implementing more imaginative programs of service.-Elizabeth Snapp, Co- ordinator of Readers' Services, Texas W om- an's University Library, Denton. Zachert, Martha JaneK. Simulation TeiU!h- ing of Library Administration. (Bowker Series in Problem-Centered Approaches to Librarianship) New York: Bowker, 1975. 297p. $18.95 (LC 74-32041) (ISBN 0-8352-0612-2) Professor Zachert has written the first book on simulation learning that is specifi- cally designed for the preparation of library managers. Although this book has been needed because most of us know little about simulation theory, I found Professor Zachert' s style at times annoying. I was horrified, for example, by the "Chapter Highlights" at the end of the chapters in the first two parts which summarize the chapter's contents, as if the reader needed catchwordy reinforcement. Then given this method, why did she not continue it be- yond chapter 5? I also found annoying Professor Zachert' s intrusion on her ma- terials with her personal class experiences and the reprinted comments of her stu- dents' reactions to class assignments. I sup- pose that I was most annoyed because the book was not what I thought it should have been. Perhaps it could not have been writ- ten otherwise because most of us, indeed, need to be trained in the language and use of simulation, and thus only a primer need- ed to be written. I do wish, nonetheless, that Professor Zachert had not depended upon the literature and style of the profes- sional (secondary?) ·educationist, but had emulated the engineers instead. Recent Publications I 421 Parts I and II (chapters 1-5) are neces- sary preliminary matters which delineate simulation and teaching. The simulation model is a selection of the central features of reality. As such, the simulation is not only a representation of reality; it is also a reduction of reality to certain basics so that teaching and learning can occur. If the pro- fessor is capable of this style of teaching, the use of simulation in the classroom is much more demanding of the professor than the lecture. The professor becomes more detached from the group of learners and acts as a resource person instead of a deliverer of lecture-packaged truths. A poor professor, a charlatan, can use simulation to cover inadequacies both in knowledge and technique. Use of simulation in the classroom is not only comparatively low in risk to the students. If done properly, it is certainly high in student involvement. Chapters 1-5 preface the heart of the book, namely, the four chapters of Part III on roleplay, in-basket exercises, action mazes, and games. Of these four subclasses of simulation, the more intriguing to many should be the in-basket exercises and the action mazes, although all four have cer- tain advantages for classroom use. The printing of "The Ann Davis Situation" as an example of an action maze should be ap- preciated by almost all readers. I was surprised by the paucity of the discussion on games and by the apparent identification of gaming solely with the board games such as Monopoly and its imi- -tators. There is little on computerized man- agement games. To give Professor Zachert credit, perhaps this neglect is due to the fact that there are not many versions of li- brary management games yet. Nevertheless, it is this area which holds the greatest pros- pect for us because of its possibilities of overcoming temporal spans and because of its capabilities to handle the mathematical possibili.ties of the consequences of deci- sions. It is good that Professor Zachert has given us our needed primer in simulation of library management. We now need someone to take us one step further: to write a sophisticated version.-G. A. Ru- dolph, Dean of Libraries, University of N e- braska-Lincoln.