ACRL College & Research Libraries News

College & Research Libraries News

Automating overdues in a non-automated library: The HyperCard solution

By Kitty J. Mackey

Circulation Librarian Converse College

The problem

The problem was overdue notices. As circulation librarian in a medium-sized college library, the most time-consuming task under my direction was the weekly generation of overdue notices. In our non-automated library the manual tasks of sorting overdues, filling out fine slips, updating the notices, and typing the notices and envelopes were assigned to student assistants under my charge. These tasks frequently required up to 40 of my 140 student assistant hours each week. The error rate of transposed call numbers, misspelled names, and “claims returned” items was high, and the standard three-part overdue notices used were expensive.

Yet overdues are too important to ignore, and prompt generation of overdue notices yields a high return rate and saves time and paperwork down the road. How could I:

1) design an efficient overdue process?

2) catch the interest of student assistants assigned to overdues?

3) eliminate repetitive manual processes associated with overdue notices?

The search for a solution

The ideal solution of course was to automate the library—but this was neither practical nor possible at this point. The next solution was to find an overdue program written specifically for nonautomated libraries, which would run on the Circulation Department’s powerful new Macintosh SE. After surveying the literature and spending several afternoons on the telephone with vendors, I began to suspect that such a program was not available. “Call back in six months,” one well-known vendor told me; “Put your hands on an Apple lie and I can fix you right up,” another told me; “Why do you have a Macintosh anyway? Get yourself an IBM and we’ll get you going,” yet another said.

One possibility I investigated closely was Open Stack, a $5.00 library automation program written for HyperCard and available from Walking Shadow Press. Although Open Stack is an impressive accumulation of programming that can handle acquisitions, cataloging, and circulation functions, it is more suited to smaller libraries than to our collection of 167,000 items. However, I had been scrutinizing HyperCard since its first appearance in 1987, and had developed a great respect for this deceivingly powerful piece of software which Apple packs free with the Macintosh. A closer examination of Open Stack revealed that HyperCard was the perfect answer to my problem and that Hyper talk, HyperCard's programming language was easy to learn. Thus I embarked on a project to design my own overdue program.

The HyperCard solution

True to the spirit of Apple computers, HyperCard's basic instructions are written in everyday language and symbols which the average user can quickly master. Information in HyperCard is organized by subject or task, and stored in files called “stacks.” Each stack is actually a set of “cards” (just like electronic Rolodex cards) in which the user can flip forward or backward, browse quickly, or sort, among other functions. “Buttons,” which can appear either as words or as symbols, are the workhorses of HyperCard; your click is their command.

The literal beauty of HyperCard is that cards can be designed to accept either text or graphics or both; “background” graphics and text can be added to give cards a more familiar appearance. On-screen instructions can be written out as briefly or as fully as necessary.

HyperCardhas several features that make it a logical choice for the program I developed, Overdue Writer. First, there is no limit to the number of cards one can have in a stack, a necessary requirement when building a database of any type. (Of course, the storage capacity of the computer itself may be limiting. HyperCard runs best when used with no less than a 20MB hard disk.) Second, a SORT feature allows cards to be sorted by specified criteria. Third, with HyperCard's FIND feature the user can enter a word or value in the message box, and HyperCard will go to the card in the stack containing that piece of information. HyperCard's newest version (1.2) has enhanced the FIND function and allows a FIND WHOLE option, which will search for an exact match to a string of words. This FIND WHOLE function is one of the cornerstones of Overdue Writer.

The fourth and last reason for using HyperCard was the programming ease it offers. I am not a computer programmer, but I have had enough programming experience to know that a similar program in COBOL or even in BASIC would have taken me at least six months to write—assuming that I had the expertise. Using HyperCard's HELP stack and borrowing ideas from pre-existing stacks and buttons, I learned HyperCard's scripting language as I was designing Overdue Writer, one function at a time. Although there are enhancements still to be made, the program was generating overdues just two weeks after I launched into the project. It has been a long time coming, but with HyperCard, average users finally have the power to make the machines fit us.

An overview of Overdue Writer

Overdue Writeris based on two main stacks: a Patron Registration Stack and an Overdue Notice Stack. The Patron Registration Stack is a database of all library borrowers, and includes the information previously stored on our paper Rolodex plus a little more. Since student assistants do most of the work with overdues, it is important that the “look” of the stack be familiar and self-explanatory. Thus, each “field” (space for a specific type of information) is clearly identified and on-screen instructions provide direction.

When instructions are too lengthy to put on the card itself, the HELP button becomes an invaluable tool. Cards in the Patron Registration Stack have a button which when clicked will cause the current screen to disappear and be replaced with a screen on which the different patron codes are described. Clicking another button will return the user to the original Patron Registration card. The ease of creating such on-screen help options eliminates the need for a paper procedure manual.

The real labor-saving buttons in the Patron Registration Stack are the “Click here to copy patron name…” arrows, which when clicked will create a new card in the Overdue Notice Stack and copy the patron’s name, address, and social security number onto the appropriate fields in the new overdue notice card.

The Overdue Notice Stack is the second stack on which Overdue Writer is based. Patron information is automatically transferred from the Patron Registration Stack, thus eliminating typing errors and redundancy. The text field for overdue information is a scrolling field, which provides the flexibility needed to accommodate patrons with one overdue item or thirty, as well as books with longer call numbers or titles. There is simply no limit to the amount of information that can be included in this field, yet it takes up less than a third of the total screen.

The Overdue Stack also contains a field for keeping track of how many notices a patron has been sent and their mailing dates. Clicking in the box next to the First Notice, Second Notice, or Third Notice buttons will enter the day’s date on the screen. Not only will this date be transferred to the final printout of the overdue, but Overdue Writer allows the user to sort the overdue notices by First Notice date, a handy feature for updating the overdue files.

One weakness with HyperCard is the limited option for printing information from stacks in a report format. Although HyperCard's print report features are more than adequate for printing out working copies of stacks to use for checking the shelves or other in-house chores, none of the print report formats are of sufficient quality to use as a final copy for mailing to patrons. Printing each card as shown on the screen and using that as the final copy was an option, but again not an acceptable one; information in scrolling fields would be lost and on-screen user prompts would have to be limited and hidden. The solution chosen was Activision’s Reports, a very versatile program that makes up for the print report weakness in HyperCard.

With Reports I was able to create my own design for an overdue notice, including a simple inksaving letterhead, space for overdue item information, and a space for name and address which will show through a windowed envelope. Once the layout is created it can be edited if needed, but more importantly, with just a click of the mouse the printer can be left alone to do what previously required hours of manual typing.

The overdue process, step-by-step

Once overdue items have been identified, circulation cards are sorted manually by patron library card number. The circulation assistant enters HyperCard's Home Card and clicks on the picture (icon) for Overdue Writer. This takes the circulation assistant to the introduction card of the Patron Registration Stack. Using the FIND WHOLE feature on the screen, the circulation assistant enters the patron’s library card number. The card for that patron will appear on the screen. The circulation assistant checks to make sure that this patron is supposed to receive overdue notices (faculty do not) and checks for any special notes in the message field. If overdues are to be sent, the circulation assistant simply clicks on the appropriate “Copy information to Overdue Notice” arrow to transfer the patron’s name, social security number, and address to a blank card in the Overdue Notice Stack.

An overdue notice card will now appear on the screen for this patron. Information on overdue items is added to the scrolling text field and the First Notice box is checked which makes the day’s date appear. The circulation assistant then clicks a button to go back to the patron registration file and repeats the process until notices have been made for all the overdue items.

Second and third notices can be updated quickly and simultaneously. The circulation assistant simply goes through the stack card by card, verifies that the items are still overdue (by cross-checking the circulation cards), and clicks the appropriate notice button (i.e. Second Notice or Third Notice) to enter the current date. If the “Third Notice” button is checked, an additional message informing the patron of the minimum price of the overdue material and the billing date (two weeks hence) appears on the screen.

Overdue notices for which First, Second, and Third Notices have already been sent are copied to a third stack not yet mentioned, the Billing Stack, by clicking the “Send For Billing” Icon. The cards for these notices are then deleted from the current stack in order to save printing time and costs.

To print out the stack of first, second, and third notices, the user clicks the Reports icon, then chooses PRINT from the options given. Reports will then take over the process until all the cards in the stack have been printed. The notices are then ready to be separated and inserted into windowed envelopes.

At the end of each month cards in the Billing Stack are updated with the date and replacement costs and items still unreturned are checked against the shelves. Using Reports, a billing list is printed and sent to the college Business Office.

In the manual files I still have not found a way of getting the necessity of having a fine slip attached to each circulation card. These fine slips not only serve as a record for unpaid fines—a necessity in a college where students regularly charge their library fines home—but when they are collected in a box as overdue items are returned, they provide an easy way to clear returned materials from the Overdue Notice Stack. After some experimenting with letting Reports generate fine slips, I’ve found that it’s still easier to use the standard self-adhesive type fine slips—only now I’ve abbreviated the process to include only the library card number, call number, abbreviated title, and the due date, which can be copied quickly from the circulation card.

When the computer notices are updated and mailed, the fine slips on the circulation cards are also updated by manually filling in the date in the appropriate notice box. As materials are returned, circulation assistants complete the fine slips with the date returned, the fines due, and whether or not fines were paid. The fine slips are then put in a box at the circulation desk and are used to update the overdue notices in Overdue Writer.

To update notices in Overdue Writer, the circulation assistant utilizes the FIND or FIND WHOLE features to look up the call number of the item or the patron’s number in the Overdue Stack. The item is deleted from the notice; if all items of a notice have been deleted the notice itself is deleted from the Overdue Stack. If the fine has been paid the fine slip is thrown away; if the fine is to be charged, the circulation assistant sends a postcard to inform the patron of the fine and files the slip in a manual billing file.

Thus the cycle of materials control comes full circle through a “manually automated” set of procedures. The three objectives I set out to achieve Aave been met: the overdue process is more efficient, students are eager to work with the computer, and the repetitive transcribing processes have been cut to a minimum. The entire overdue process requires less than ten hours per week, a full quarter of the time previously required. (One enhancement I would like to add to Overdue Writer is to use a digital scanner for inputting book information; this would completely eliminate typing from the overdue process and would save even more time.)

There is a fourth intangible benefit as well: students who formerly simply performed tasks are now receiving an education in computer literacy— no small asset in today’s world. Before embarking on Overdue Writer students must first work through the Macintosh tutorial disk, achieve some competency with MacWrite and MacDraw, and work through HyperCard’s tutorial. I hope that by the end of the year at least one of them will be writing her own overdue stacks or making enhancements to Overdue Writer. Then I will know that this clerical chore has been transformed into an educational experience not only for myself, but also for my student assistants. This is my ultimate goal as an educator.

Overdue Writer is available for $5.00 (the price of a disk, package, and postage) from the author. Write Kitty Mackey, Mickel Library, Converse College, Spartanburg, SC 29301. Personalizations and enhancements to Overdue Writer are permitted and encouraged.

Fourth U.S.-Japan Conference on Libraries and Information Science

The fourth in a series of irregularly held conferences of academic librarians from the U.S. and Japan was held at the Wingspread Conference Center in Racine, Wisconsin, Oct. 3-6, 1988. Entitled “Strengthening the U.S.-Japan Library Partnership in the Global Information Flow,” the conference followed thirteen years after the third, which was held in Kyoto in 1975. Earlier meetings had convened in 1969 and 1972.

To support the meeting, ALA received grants and services valued at $100,000 from the Japan- United States Friendship Commission and the Johnson Foundation.

Conference co-chairs were: Theodore F. Welch, director of libraries at Northern Illinois University and chair of the ALA Advisory Committee on Liaison with Japanese Libraries; and Haruo Kuroda, professor, Faculty of Science, and university librarian at the University of Tokyo. Seventy-two librarians and educators met to consider conservation and preservation, database and network development in the U.S. and Japan, development and application of CJK files in the U.S. and the development and application of MARC/JIS standards in Japan.

Major U.S. speakers were Patricia Battin, president of the Commission on Preservation and Access; John Haeger, Research Libraries Group (RLG); Henriette Avram, Library of Congress; and Rowland C.W. Brown, OCLC. From Japan, the major speakers were Toru Sugawara, Waseda University Library; Masatoshi Shibukawa of Keio University Mita Information Center; Jun Adachi, National Center for Science Information System (NACSIS); Eiichi Kurahashi, University of Tokyo Library; Hisafumi Tanaka, NACSIS; and Kimio Ohno, Hokkaido University Library.

The format of the meeting included general sessions, in which simultaneous translation was available, and discussion groups, in which translation followed paragraph by paragraph as the speaker paused. One impact of this procedure was to drive home how serious a barrier language can be. Even in this optimal translation situation, the need for patience was great and misunderstandings were still possible.

At least one major breakthrough occurred at the Conference, when key participants came to an understanding about the CJK character set and an agreement on implementation.

Nine resolutions were drafted on the final day. They represent measures to strengthen cooperative relationships between university libraries in Japan and the U.S.

1) A fifth conference should be convened in Japan; date, theme and topics to be determined by representatives; size similar to the fourth.

2) Small-scale meetings on specialized topics will be convened as needed on an ad hoc basis.

3) To promote the international flow of CJK bibliographic data, delegates urged respect for the development of language processing capabilities most appropriate to the countries of East Asia and the freedom of each country to develop its own national standards. Liaisons should be established.

4) Libraries in Japan and the U.S. should endeavor to raise the consciousness of society and take specific actions regarding the use of acid-free paper. Exchange of information should be promoted.

5) Libraries in Japan and the U.S. will endeavor to help each other in their respective collection development activities for both Japanese and U.S. publications.

6) Mutual use of the two countries’ databases should be promoted.

7) There should be further study of the need, scope of service, and linkage modalities of networks in both countries.

8) Appropriate clauses in the copyright law of the two countries governing copy services provided in lieu of ILL should continue to be protected.

9) Future conferees should consider issues related to the production of databases and the resulting need for resource sharing in the special libraries context.

This conference has serious implications for academic librarians on both sides of the Pacific. The importance of Japan as a partner in exchanges of information in the future cannot be ignored, as it has been for too long. Our recent recognition of the beauties of Japanese culture must be broadened to include the burgeoning scientific and technological developments and, most practically, to promote the need for knowledge of the Japanese language.