College and Research Libraries


B y P E Y T O N H U R T 

Principles and Standards for 
Surveying a College Library1 
Peyton Hurt is librarian at 

Williams College. 

AC O L L E G E L I B R A R Y S U R V E Y i s a c a r e -f u l , critical analysis of the condition 
of the library of a particular college. It 

gives due regard to the library's aims, 

objectives, and needs, and may outline a 

statement of plans for f u t u r e development. 

In practice, such a survey is often a long-

needed thorough inquiry into the condition 

of a w e a k library, w i t h the double purpose 

of deciding on needed improvements and 

stimulating the necessary interest and aid 

to enliven the library's f u t u r e . B u t a 

systematic survey may be more useful to 

a good library than to a poor one, for 

nearly anyone can point out important 

weaknesses in a poor library, w h i l e only a 

careful study w i l l show faults in a good 

one. A n d at the same time, the poorer 

institutions are usually confined to limited 

library service by financial considerations, 

whereas the colleges w i t h better libraries 

sometimes have funds enough to permit 

costly mistakes in extensive library devel-

opment. E v e n the smallest colleges seem 

able to venture into strange paths, often 

in vain attempts to imitate larger colleges, 

or even universities, in the provision of 

1 T h e material of this article was developed f o r 
later inclusion in a p r o j e c t e d m a n u a l on " S u r v e y i n g 
the College L i b r a r y . " I t is based on a paper read 
at the Twenty-eighth A n n u a l C o n f e r e n c e of E a s t e r n 
College L i b r a r i a n s at Columbia U n i v e r s i t y . Novem-
ber 23, 1940. 

library services. Consequently, any col-

lege interested in guaranteeing f u l l co-

ordination of library services w i t h its 

educational program may employ the 

library survey to good advantage. In fact, 

wise administration should call for fre-

quent study and analysis of college library 

functions, to give greater vitality to that 

often avowed "heart of the college." 

Definition of a College Library 

In order to survey a college library and 

plan its f u t u r e development w e should 

first define the library and establish its 

proper place in the college. T h e library 

should operate as an integral part of the 

w h o l e college, deriving significance f r o m 

its functions in the larger institution 

which it serves. It should be defined as 

a dynamic institution, comprising books, 

physical plant, and staff, organized and 

functioning in the college program. T h e 

college library is not merely the books, the 

building, and the staff, ready and w a i t i n g 

to serve the students and faculty upon 

demand. T h e use of the library, the 

services w h i c h it performs, are definitely 

part of the institution itself. T h e library 

is thus a going concern, alive and partici-

pating in the college educational process. 

In surveying the library, one should go 

f u r t h e r and define it as including the atti-

tude of the president, faculty, and students 

t o w a r d library facilities, use, and problems. 

110 ' COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES 



T h e college library is therefore to be 

surveyed as an active institution, including 

the library building, the book collection, 

the staff, the organization, arrangement, 

and distribution of these facilities, the atti-

tude of the president, faculty, and students 

t o w a r d it, and its use by students and 

faculty in their collegiate activities. In 

short the college library is to be evaluated 

by h o w its organized facilities operate as 

a college department. It must be con-

sidered w i t h due emphasis on those charac-

teristics which make it dynamic, active, 

and functioning within the whole college 

organization. 

In order to show the validity of the 

characteristics included in the definition 

above, w e may formulate a brief descrip-

tive statement of a hypothetical institution. 

O n e might thus speak of X College as 

having a large book collection, rich in 

basic source materials, but lean in current 

books and items for college courses, a 

scholarly staff devoted to the development 

of research materials but una are of the 

important current book needs of the col-

lege program, or unsympathetic w i t h such 

needs, a building designed primarily for 

architectural qualities, T,rhich w i t h related 

memorial features haT . distorted normal 

distribution of books and prevented effi-

cient and economical arrangement of li-

brary services, and a president and faculty 

who, though critical of library inefficien-

cies, were apparently satisfied w i t h an 

instructional program which did not result 

in extensive student reading as evidenced 

by library use. 

If w e break the definition into its vari-

ous component parts, w e may readily see 

that, by limitation of the points covered, 

the value of the description is greatly cur-

tailed. It is not enough, for example, to 

say that X C o l l e g e L i b r a r y has a large 

book collection, rich in basic source ma-

terials, housed in a luxurious building, and 

managed by a staff w i t h deep scholarly 

interests. T h e sacrifice of functional aims 

to "aesthetic" architectural considerations, 

which appears to be a curse of college 

library buildings, the failure of the 'faculty 

and staff to stimulate student use of the 

library, and the lack of current material 

for class use, more than offset the good 

features of this library, especially if it is 

to be judged by its contribution to the 

college educational program. 

Data for the College Library Survey 

T h e techniques of investigating library 

problems are developing rapidly. D a t a 

on college libraries are regularly collected, 

analyzed, and appraised for their meaning 

and significance. Compiled statistics of 

college and university libraries are pub-

lished each year. V a r i o u s features of col-

lege libraries have been critically analyzed 

and standards for some phases of library 

service have become fairly w e l l established. 

O t h e r problems of library organization 

and practice are currently being explored 

and mapped for the guidance of all inter-

ested in college library development. 

T h e results furnish us a body of data and 

indicate methods of surveying a college 

library w i t h a fair certainty of reaching 

an accurate diagnosis of its condition and 

needs. F r o m such a survey, it is no doubt 

possible to prescribe reasonably sure cures 

for college library ailments. . 

It is nevertheless easier to survey and 

measure various individual features of a 

college library than to determine w h a t 

their measurement means. T h e question 

is not so much how to survey a jcollege 

library as w h a t to survey and how prop-

erly .to evaluate the results. Continued 

research in library science w i l l develop 

MARC hi, 1941 111 



additional means of collecting significant 

data and more exact tests for evaluating 

statistics of various kinds. B u t the col-

lection of statistics and other factual data 

w i l l never in itself constitute an appraisal 

of a college library. O n e must go beyond 

statistical data and consider other factors. 

W e may measure all tangible things and 

still be lacking in- material for a sound 

diagnosis of the significance and value of 

the services of a particular library. F o r 

there are some unmeasurable conditions 

w h i c h are the decisive elements in library 

service. T h i s is not to say that the factors 

usually considered and the statistics regu-

l a r l y counted are unimportant. It is 

rather that there are some m a j o r factors 

w i t h implications not so readily counted, 

and some unmeasurable conditions essen-

tial to the evaluation of library facilities, 

organization, and practice. F o r example: 

H o w shall w e measure library use? I t is 

one of the somewhat intangible factors of 

greatest importance. Statistics of book 

circulation and library attendance records 

w i l l measure roughly the quantity of 

library use. B u t if w e ask, use for w h a t 

and to w h a t avail, they furnish no answer. 

W e must consider factors which for the 

present cannot be reduced to statistical 

data. 

In the last analysis, the whole library 

survey must depend upon the exercise of 

sound j u d g m e n t . T h i s judgment, that is, 

expert opinion, must analyze, evaluate, 

and interpret statistical data and other ob-

jective measurements. I t must also take 

into account those factors w h i c h cannot 

be reduced to statistics or otherwise meas-

ured in quantity. In this appraisal a 

systematic approach w i l l limit and direct 

the exercise o f j u d g m e n t and the use of 

expert opinion, so that w e may be sure to 

find the true meaning of facts, figures, and 

112 ' 

observations collected in the course of a 

library survey. 

Standards for College Libraries 

G o o d standards of measurement and 

sound principles of j u d g m e n t w i l l intro-

duce into a library survey some of the 

qualities of scientific observation and 

evaluation. Standards are needed to give 

perspective to the consideration of data 

about a library. Principles of j u d g m e n t 

are needed to furnish a point of v i e w , to 

guarantee careful and critical considera-

tion of all pertinent factors on some estab-

lished basis, or in a stated frame of refer-

ence. 

M o s t college library standards are based 

on comparisons. Such standards arise 

f r o m the collection and publication of 

annual library statistics and f r o m special 

studies and surveys for w h i c h data are col-

lected and made public. B y these statis-

tics, one institution may be compared w i t h 

another or w i t h all others. Standards are 

set as better than the lowest ranking col-

leges, equal to the average, or in the upper 

ranks. 

E v e n expert opinion is based largely 

upon comparative standards; which is to 

say that the expert w i l l compare features 

of a given library w i t h w h a t his experience 

and special training tell him to be the 

standard for any similar library in the 

same situation. T h e expert w i l l go f u r -

ther, of course, and deduce standards by 

considering all relevant factors in the 

light of his o w n experience and insight 

into library organization and practice. 

T h u s a college library survey may create 

standards against w h i c h to measure par-

ticular features of the library under ob-

servation. 

C o m p a r a t i v e findings soon tend to be 

converted into more or less exact state-

COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES 



ments of standards for individual features 

of college library organization and prac-

tice. So library literature is fairly definite 

on matters such as h o w much money a 

college library should expend per student, 

on the percentage of funds to be spent for 

books and for staff, on the proportion of 

the students to be provided w i t h seating 

space in the reading rooms, and even on 

the number of books likely to be borrowed 

per student for home use. Likewise, w e 

have check lists of reference books, of 

periodicals, and of best books, as w e l l as 

pay-plans, and manuals of service prepared 

by college library experts. Sponsored by 

college accrediting agencies and by librar-

ians' professional associations, these are 

the fruit of comparative data and of expert 

opinion, designed to stimulate and aid col-

lege library surveys. 

B u t in the final analysis, each institution 

must be judged by how w e l l it performs 

the services required to meet the needs of 

its o w n particular college. F o r this, each 

institution must somehow create its o w n 

standards, and w e should rely most heavily 

upon these individual standards in any 

survey to determine the quality of the 

facilities, organization, and services of a 

particular library. 

Principles for Appraising College Library 

Functions 

T h e formulation of standards for a 

college library and the appraisal of sta-

tistics, observations, and comparative data 

regarding it call for some underlying prin-

ciples of judgment. Comparison w i t h 

other libraries, as discussed in preceding 

pages, is a much-used measure against 

which to consider the adequacy of the 

book collection, staff, library funds, and 

other items in library organization and 

practice. A s a principle of judgment, the 

use of these check lists and measuring rods 

ranks high in convenience and effectiveness 

in demonstrating the relative inadequacy 

of poorer institutions. Such yardsticks 

may not be reliable for better college 

libraries, however, where there may be 

sharp variation from the average, or stand-

ard, w i t h o u t any failure to meet effec-

tively the requirements of library service 

arising from the college educational pro-

gram. 

A basic principle, as stated above, should 

be to measure each college library by its 

o w n objectives. T h e s e objectives should 

first be scrutinized and evaluated in the 

light of the college's individual educational 

program, and then their accomplishment 

may be taken as a fair test of the library's 

efficiency as a college department. T h e 

nature of the college program is the de-

termining factor in the functions of the 

library. A n y limitation of the college 

educational activities, special emphasis on 

particular phases of the curriculum, or 

variation for the college as a whole, should 

necessarily set limits to the main lines of 

library development. 

Some statement of the aims and objec-

tives of the whole college is therefore of 

first importance to a library survey. T h i s 

statement should d r a w a clear distinction 

between the liberal arts college, w i t h its 

teaching program, and the university, w i t h 

its graduate study, emphasis on research, 

and various professional schools. M a n y 

college libraries suffer from failure on the 

part of the controlling authorities to dis-

tinguish between the proper extent and 

nature of the contents and services of a 

college library, a university library, and a 

research library. Presidents, librarians, 

and faculties should be careful to avoid 

thinking of the college library in terms of 

their o w n experience w i t h the university 

MARC hi, 1941 113 



library for graduate study or other uni-

versity w o r k . 

Financial Limitations a Factor 

Consideration of the financial limita-

tions of a college should be a fundamental 

factor in setting standards for its library. 

O n l y a f e w colleges can afford to try to 

imitate universities in the collection of 

research materials and the provision of 

elaborate library facilities not needed for 

the college teaching program. E v e n these 

should consider h o w such enlarged services 

might interfere w i t h the main objectives 

of college library service. T h e cost of the 

library service is a main consideration even 

w h e n it is clearly within the college's 

ability to pay. B u t consideration of cost 

should be balanced by equal consideration 

of value received. L i b r a r y costs should be 

compared sometimes w i t h costs of other 

college functions. T h e annual cost of 

books and library service in a given field, 

for example, may seem trifling if com-

pared w i t h the total salaries paid to 

instructors in that field, even w i t h due 

regard to their respective contributions to 

the college program. T h e balancing of 

cost against real value received should pre-

vent the false economy of curtailment of 

essential library expenditures. A t the 

same time, it should eliminate some un-

necessary but costly features which are apt 

to creep unnoticed into college library 

practice, and then be continued for years 

through habit or through mistaken notions 

of their significance to college functions. 

Some luxuries may be w o r t h the cost, but 

a college library survey must question both 

cost and value received in the appraisal of 

library services. 

O n e must consider the size and charac-

ter of the student body in setting standards 

for library service. A s an obvious exam-

ple, the large college in a metropolitan 

area, w i t h a mixed student body, many of 

them non-resident, has problems of library 

service quite different f r o m those of a 

college situated in a small village and 

having a limited and homogeneous group 

of students. M o r e subtle differences in 

student attitudes, living conditions, and 

general campus life may be the basis for 

significant distinctions in library organi-

zation and practice. 

T h e degree of integration of one feature 

of college library organization and prac-

tice w i t h others and w i t h all related activi-

ties of the whole college is a point for 

serious consideration. Needless subdivi-

sion of functions is costly and productive 

of unprofitable specialization of effort. 

L a c k of unification, of coordination, of 

cooperation, or of integration may some-

times be a serious f a u l t in library services 

w h i c h at first sight seem to be efficient 

units of the college organization. 

T h e attitude of the president and fac-

ulty t o w a r d the library is also an impor-

tant point to consider in g a u g i n g the 

suitability of library services. If extensive 

library use is not wanted, library standards 

should be set accordingly, making some 

allowance, of course, for the influence 

good library service may have in leading 

the faculty to make more use of the library 

for collegiate w o r k . 

Counterbalance Expert Opinion 

E x p e r t opinion should play a part in 

any survey to evaluate library facilities, 

organization, or practice. It is desirable, 

however, to counterbalance the opinion of 

the expert, based on intimate k n o w l e d g e 

of technical detail, w i t h the untrammelled 

and often broader vision of interested 

scholars w i t h o u t training or experience in 

library practice. B u t too often laymen 

114 ' COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES 



can only "discover" w h a t is common 

knowledge to experienced librarians. O n 

the other hand, failure to give due con-

sideration to expert opinion on library 

problems may result in failure to recognize 

practical restrictions to the development 

of well-meant but unmanageable programs 

for library development. 

C o l l e g e teaching methods are a sound 

guide for determining library objectives, 

and for measuring the need for different 

kinds of library service. T e a c h i n g meth-

ods have for years past been changing in 

the direction of requiring wider collateral 

reading and less dependence on a single 

text. B u t this change is not nearly so 

widespread or so f u l l y accepted as many 

w o u l d assume. In any case, a careful 

analysis of teaching methods and conse-

quent library use in a particular college is 

a much better basis for planning library 

service than a general assumption on this 

point. 

T h e degree of independent study and 

extracurricular reading should help de-

termine college library standards almost as 

much as the closely related matter of 

teaching methods. Honors courses usually 

require w i d e r reading and more independ-

ent library use. M o s t student extra-

curricular reading is likely to be an 

o u t g r o w t h of good teaching and of inter-

esting courses of study. Ideally it should 

be so, but such reading may be stimulated 

by the library itself, through arrangement 

of the book collection and display of 

selected material so as to attract student 

and faculty attention and arouse interest. 

Faculty Research a Factor 

T h e extent and nature of faculty re-

search is another extracurricular factor 

to be considered in determining college 

library policy and practice. I f , as has been 

recommended, the college does not attempt 

to be a university, its library may w e l l set 

limits to the amount of research materials 

to be collected and preserved for faculty 

use. T h e development of a good reference 

collection, the use of microfilm, of inter-

library loan, and perhaps a college policy 

of granting funds for travel and research, 

should be considered as alternatives to 

attempts at actually supplying research 

library materials and service. Here, as in 

other factors affecting the library, there is 

need to formulate definite college policies 

which w i l l serve to guide library develop-

ment. 

N o t all of the principles affecting j u d g -

ment of the library are based on library 

use arising from the college program. T o 

a certain extent the college library is an 

end in itself, and can exert a p o w e r f u l 

influence on the development of the col-

lege. T h e degree of library influence in 

the college program is a matter for con-

siderable thought in a library survey. 

T h i s involves the position and prestige of 

the librarian and his staff in the college 

community, and also the extent to which 

the library controls or shapes the educa-

tional process. 

It is unwise for the college library to 

try to be too much of an end in itself. 

But there is clearly a responsibility for it 

to be something of a depository of books 

on all subjects, a storehouse of learning 

for the academic community, and the basis 

for study and teaching of topics not imme-

diately covered by the curriculum. T h e 

library has also an obligation to lead the 

college in the field of books. T h e history 

of printing, fine books, rare books—these 

are fields in which the library has some 

inherent responsibility. T o preserve and 

exhibit occasionally materials of this kind 

is a natural function of the college library. 

MARC hi, 1941 115 



L i k e w i s e there are some fields in which 

special collections may properly be de-

veloped. College memorabilia and docu-

ments of local history usually must be 

collected by the college library if they are 

to be preserved at all. So also the library 

may be expected to provide cultural read-

ing, books of general interest, and even 

purely recreational reading, just because 

it is the source of reading materials of all 

kinds for students and f a c u l t y . F i n a l l y , 

the library has some monumental f e a t u r e s : 

it is often the institution, or building, 

most frequently shown to visitors to the 

college. In the same w a y , it may be a 

memorial building and may house some 

memorial collections. 

B u t all these characteristics w h i c h tend 

to make the library an end in i t s e l f — f r o m 

leadership in the field of books to monu-

mental and memorial f e a t u r e s — s h o u l d be 

scrutinized very critically in setting stand-

ards for college library practice. T h e s e 

things should be examined w i t h due regard 

to their significance and effect on the 

whole college library program. T o a cer-

tain extent, the college library may have 

legitimate functions not directly connected 

w i t h college study and teaching. B u t the 

cultivation of these extracurricular fea-

tures of the library may easily become a 

costly l u x u r y , interfering w i t h more im-

portant phases of college library service. 

A library survey is often needed to deter-

mine w h a t should be the main lines of 

library development, to distinguish the 

important from the unimportant, the es-

sential f r o m the luxurious features of col-

lege library organization and practice. 

Summary 

A college library survey takes into ac-

count the w h o l e library as a dynamic 

institution, organized and functioning in 

the college educational program. Stand-

ards may be found in library literature and 

furthermore may be set up by comparing 

one library w i t h others. B u t in the last 

analysis, a library must be judged by its 

o w n standards, based on the performance 

of the aims and objectives set for it by its 

o w n college program. F o r systematic 

procedure, some basic principles of j u d g -

ment are essential to the formulation of 

standards and the evaluation of data in a 

library survey. 

T h e underlying principles of j u d g m e n t 

should be: ( i ) the measurement of each 

library mainly by its o w n standards; ( 2 ) 

the use also of comparative standards and 

of recognized " y a r d s t i c k s " ; ( 3 ) a state-

ment of the aims and objectives of the 

whole college as a basis for the library 

p r o g r a m ; ( 4 ) consideration of the finan-

cial limitations of the c o l l e g e ; ( 5 ) the 

cost of library service balanced against 

value received; ( 6 ) the size and character 

of the student body as the basis for dis-

tinctions in library organization and prac-

tice; ( 7 ) the degree of integration of 

library and college functions as a measure 

of efficiency; ( 8 ) the attitude of the 

president and faculty as an influence on 

library p l a n s ; ( 9 ) due consideration of 

expert as w e l l as lay opinion; ( 1 0 ) college 

teaching methods as a basis for the extent 

and nature of library services; ( 1 1 ) inde-

pendent study, honors courses, and extra-

curricular reading as additional f a c t o r s ; 

( 1 2 ) the extent and nature of faculty 

research, and college policy in support of 

it, as a guide to library practice; ( 1 3 ) the 

degree to which the library is to be an end 

in i t s e l f — a s a storehouse of learning, as a 

leader in the field of books, as a source 

of general and recreational reading, and 

as a monumental or memorial feature of 

the college. 

116 ' COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES