ACRL College & Research Libraries News

Association of College & Research Libraries

From Lima to Reading: The great library visit

By Charles Hanson Lima Campus Librarian Ohio State University

A short article in College and Research Libraries News, “Visit a London Library” (April 1984, p. 187), highlighted an excellent opportunity for American librarians to visit one of the many libraries in the greater London area. I found the procedure for arranging a visit to be simple and expedient. After writing the Library Association to inform the director of the days I would be in the London area, I received a written confirmation of my appointment with the chief librarian of the University of Reading. Precise information was provided for the day and time, the contact person, and the telephone number of two people, Edward Dudley at the Library Association and James Thompson at the university, in case my plans were altered.

I wanted my visit to an academic library to be as productive as possible; therefore, I specified in my letter to the Library Association my areas of interest—automation, administration, records management, and supervision—as well as describing briefly the collection size and student population of the Ohio State University-Lima Campus. It was my good fortune to visit the University of Reading Library, located about 35 miles from London, a medium-sized academic library with approximately 620,000 volumes, a staff of 80, a student population of 5800, and three department (branch) libraries—music, education, and agriculture. I was doubly fortunate in that the chief librarian, James Thompson, spent several hours with me in an informal, conversational presentation about libraries and librarianship.

This informal discussion focused on many areas of library administration, but it was the automation project, a cooperative adventure with the Southwestern Academic Library Cooperative Automation Project (SWALCAP) with a mainframe computer in Bristol, that seemed to be the center of much library staff effort. Since joining in 1979, the Reading Library has worked on conversion of the existing collection to automated entries, is currently using an automated circulation system, and hopes eventually to have an online catalog (all catalog entries since 1980 are on microfiche). The system is not used at present for interlibrary loan, which is handled by telex system with the British Library Lending Division in Yorkshire.

During the tour of the library, during which the new addition to the library was described, I discovered the library to be busy, in some areas crowded (hence the need for a new addition). There is a pleasant archives area and a large number of rare books, all supervised by a records management team which has published Records Management in British Universities, a guide with possible application for American universities. One of the archivists pointed out to me that the Reading Library had one of the finest Samuel Beckett collections, and he noted that one of the English scholars from the OSU-Lima Campus had utilized the Reading collection in his research on Beckett. Not suprisingly, one of the busiest areas of the library is photocopy services, with over one million copies produced annually. The chief librarian maintained that reference and reader services were the key elements of library service, that emphasis was placed on making the library user friendly, all of which seemed evident on our tour.

While it would be possible to elaborate on similarities and differences of my library compared to The University of Reading Library, I should quickly point out that the best part of the visit was the informal, direct contact with another library administrator. That James Thompson is a recognized authority on libraries, author of Library Power and The End of Libraries, was secondary to our lively conversation involving space utilization, cooperative sharing of resources, staffing, and career development. As I came away from the visit carrying annual reports, a records management handbook, and several guides to the library, I felt that this sharing of information helps to create a sort of universal librarianship, a meeting of minds that spans many miles.

Putting college libraries online

On Monday, June 25, the College Library Section and the ACRL/BIS Computer Concerns Committee sponsored an unusual joint meeting that consisted of discussion groups meeting simultaneously for two separate sessions to talk about “Putting College Libraries Online.” For the last few years, members of CLS have expressed an interest in a discussion format for their meetings—a way in which problems of current concern can be aired and solutions considered in a group exchange of opinion.

In this program we attempted the first experiment with this idea. The audience was broken up into ten discussion groups; after the discussions a wrap-up leader coordinated and synthesized the discoveries which the various groups had made. Each group dealt with the program topic from a different perspective. Time was allotted for each of the attendees to participate in discussions at two different tables.

The group leaders and their topics were: Sharon Mader (Memphis State University) on end user searching; Katherine Branch (Welch Medical Li brary) on teaching online searching concepts; Mi chael Haeuser (Gustavus Adolphus College) on au tomation financing; Martha Lawry (Ohio State University) on planning for an online catalog; Bar bara Wittkopf (University of Florida) on reference service online; Pat Arnott (University of Delaware) on CAI programs; Charlotte Cubbage (Northwest ern University) on user education; Marianne Grant (Rutgers University) on planning for online ser vices; Gail Lawrence (University of Arkansas at Little Rock) on training end users; and Sandy Ward (Stanford University) on teaching students to use DIALOG.

The program was very successful and attracted approximately 150 people, most of whom stayed for the duration.—Joann H. Lee, Head, Reader Services, Lake Forest College, Illinois (program moderator).

ACRL Publications in Librarianship needs your manuscripts

ACRL Publications in Librarianship, a series devoted to scholarly monographs in academic librarianship, has issued over 40 volumes since 1952. Many of these studies represent distinguished contributions to the history, theory, and practice of academic librarianship.

The editorial board invites authors of booklength studies to submit manuscripts for review. Proposals for manuscripts in progress are welcome and should be accompanied by an outline of the contents. The submission of dissertations is encouraged; however, many may require substantial revision by the author (see the guidelines for converting a dissertation to a book on the following page).

Manuscripts will be acknowledged and read by at least two members of the editorial board.

Manuscripts related to the following topics are particularly welcome: administration of college libraries; computer applications; collection assessment; management of reference services; selfdirected studies; and staff development.

Relevance, lasting value, and superior writing describe the manuscripts that we are seeking. Address inquiries and proposals for publication to: Arthur P. Young, Dean of University Libraries, University of Rhode Island, Kingston, RI 02881-0803; (401) 792-2666.

How to convert a dissertation or thesis to a book

Editor’s note: These are guidelines adopted by the ACRL Publications in Librarianship Series Editorial Board.

A manuscript designed to communicate mastery of the research process to an examining committee frequently fails to satisfy the requirements of a publisher. Authors submitting theses and dissertations to a publisher may anticipate requests for extensive modifications of their manuscript if it is accepted for publication. Indeed, some effort at revision prior to submission will enhance the likelihood of acceptance.

A book is addressed to an audience that is very different from the audience to whom a thesis, dissertation, or other research report is addressed. These differences include level of interest, prior knowledge of the subject, and objectives in reading the work. Major revisions are usually necessary, even to the most effective works.

Revisions which are often required include deletions, reorganization, and the writing of additional material. Some examples:

•The style of a dissertation frequently requires the repetition of material from sectioh to section. In many cases this redundancy can be eliminated. Tables often should be deleted or converted into an explanatory narrative.

•Many of the fine points concerning prior research or methodology on the subject should be placed in appendices or footnotes.

•Abstractions must be carefully related to the concrete world through more extensive interpretation than would be necessary in a dissertation or thesis.

The editorial board of ACRL Publications in Librarianship encourages authors wishing to submit theses and dissertations for publication to read the following items prior to submission.

Olive Holmes, “Thesis to Book: What to Get Rid of,” Scholarly Publishing 5 (July 1974):339-49; 6 (October 1974): 40-50.

Olive Holmes, “Thesis to Book: What to Do with What Is Left,” Scholarly Publishing 6 (January 1975): 165-76.

Constance Greaser, “Improving the Effectiveness of Research Writing,” Scholarly Publishing 11 (October 1979):61-71.

Elsi M. Stainton, “A Bag for Authors,” Scholarly Publishing 8 (July 1977):335-45.