University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

The Library In The Administrative And Organizational Structure Of The American Public Community College

(USC Thesis Other)

The Library In The Administrative And Organizational Structure Of The American Public Community College

PDF

Download

Open document

Flip pages

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content THE LIBRARY IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE AND ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE OF THE AMERICAN PUBLIC COMMUNITY COLLEGE by Everett LeRoy Moore A Dissertation Presented to the FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (Library Science) June 1973 INFORMATION TO USERS This material was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this docum ent have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the original submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction. 1.T he sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain th e missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent pages to insure you com plete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black mark, it is an indication that the photographer suspected that the copy m ay have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the material being photographed the photographer followed a definite m ethod in "sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from left to right in equal sections with a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is continued again - beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. The majority of users indicate that the textual content is of greatest value, however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be made from "photographs" if essential to the understanding o f the dissertation. Silver prints of "photographs" may be ordered at additional charge by writing the Order Department, giving the catalog number, title, author and specific pages you wish reproduced. 5. PLEASE NOTE: Som e pages may have indistinct print. Filmed as received. Xerox University Microfilms 300 North Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106 7 3 -3 1 ,3 7 0 MOORE, Everett LeRoy, 1918- THE LIBRARY IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE AND ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE OF THE AMERICAN PUBLIC COMMUNITY COLLEGE. University of Southern California, Ph.D., 1973 Library Science University Microfilms, A X E R O X Com pany, Ann Arbor, M ichigan (§) Copyright by EVERETT LEROY MOORE 1973 U NIV ERSITY O F S O U T H E R N C A L IFO R N IA THE GRADUATE SCHOO L UNIVERSITY PARK LOS ANGELES, CA LIFO RN IA 9 0 0 0 7 This dissertation, written by Everett LeRoy Moore.......... under the direction of / i . i . s . . . Dissertation C om mittee, and approved by all its members, has been presented to and accepted by The G radu ate School, in partial fulfillment of require ments of the degree of D O C T O R O F P H I L O S O P H Y Dean DISSERTATION COMMITTEE 'hairman / i TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES LIST OF CHARTS Chapter I. STATEMENT AND DEFINITION OF PROBLEM ........ Statement of the Problem Importance of the Study Limitations of the Study Definitions of Terms Used Organization of the Study II. A PROFILE OF THE AMERICAN COMMUNITY COLLEGE . III. METHOD OF RESEARCH PROCEDURE ............... Definition of the Population and Selection of the Sample Characteristics of the Colleges Development of the Questionnaire Procedure of Requesting Data Compilation of Data Analysis of Data Summary IV. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ................... Senior College and University Organization and Administration Senior College and University Library Administration and Organization Community College Organization and Administration Community College Library Organization and Administration Summary Chapter Page V. PRINCIPLES OF COLLEGE ORGANIZATION AND ADMINISTRATION WITH PARTICULAR REFERENCE TO THE LIBRARY AND THE LIBRARIAN........ 82 Basic Principles of Administration Financial Support for Library Services Position of the Head Librarian in the Structure of College Organization Qualifications of the Head Librarian Responsibilities of the Head Librarian The Head Librarian's Rank and Status Committee on the Library Summary VI. THE LIBRARY IN THE GOVERNMENT OF AMERICAN PUBLIC COMMUNITY COLLEGES................. 113 Administrative Control of the Community Colleges The Administrative and Organizational Structure of the Library The Role of the Library Financial Support of the Library Span of Control of the Head Librarian Participation in Library Matters by the Faculty Communication with Faculty and Administration by the Head Librarian Summary VII. THE HEAD LIBRARIAN OF THE AMERICAN PUBLIC COMMUNITY COLLEGE................. 187 Introduction Legal Basis of Position Selection and Appointment Organizational Responsibility Administrative Status Faculty Rank Faculty Status— Benefits and Privileges Title of Head Librarian Participation in Campus Affairs Summary iii Chapter Page | i VIII. COMMITTEES CONCERNING THE COMMUNITY COLLEGE LIBRARY 235 \ I Friends of the Library Board of Trustees' Library Committee j Student Library Committee j Community College Faculty Library Committee Summary IX. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS . . 274 I Recapitulation Conclusions ; Recommendations ! BIBLIOGRAPHY 296 I : ( ] j ! APPENDIX A: Representative Enabling Act for Creation of Junior College Districts. 320 j | APPENDIX B: California State Statutes that do not Mention the Library or the Librarian. 332 ! APPENDIX C: Cover Letter Accompanying Questionnaire 353 | APPENDIX D: Questionnaire: The Library in the Administrative and Organizational j Structure of the American Public Community College 355 i : APPENDIX E: Follow-Up Post Card Requesting Return of Questionnaire 374 I APPENDIX F: Follow-Up Letter Requesting Return of Questionnaire 376 ; LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Enrollment Growth in Junior Colleges, 1915-1970 ......................... 17 2. Unit Growth of Junior Colleges, 1915-1970 . . 17 3. Public Community Colleges Listed by Region and Full-Time Student Enrollment . . 29 4. Public Community Colleges Listed by Region and Part-Time Student Enrollment . . 31 5. Profile of Community Colleges by Date of Founding ......................... 33 6. Years Community Colleges in Operation Arranged by Size of College ........ 34 7. Distribution of Questionnaires to 467 Community College Libraries and the Response by Regions and States of the United States of America............ 38 8. Library Expenditures as a Percentage of Educational and General Expenditures— American Public Two-Year Colleges ........ 91 9. Library Expenditures Per Full-Time Equivalent Student--American Public Two-Year Colleges. 93 10. Library Expenditures Per Full-Time Equivalent Faculty Member--American Public Two-Year Colleges ......................... 95 11. Administrative Control of Community Colleges as Indicated by Answers on Questionnaires . 116 12. State Legislative Enabling Acts Which Established and Expanded Public Two- Year Colleges............................. 119 v Table 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. Line Relationship of the Head Librarian in American Public Community Colleges . . . Organizational Patterns within Community College Libraries ..................... , Administration of Audio-Visual Services in Community Colleges Audio-Visual Services Administered by the Library ................ Audio-Visual Services Administered by Departments Other Than the Library • • • The Role of the Community College Library . Fulfillment of the Role of the Community College Library .............. Library Expenditures as a Percentage of Educational and General Expenditures-- American Public Community Colleges . . . Community Colleges with More Than 10 percent of the Budget Allocated to the Library Community Colleges with Less Than 3 percent of the Budget Allocated to the Library Book Collections in Community College Libraries, 1969 . . . ................ Full-Time Student Enrollment in Community Colleges, 1969 . . Library Expenditures Per Full-Time Equivalent Student— American Public Community Colleges Included in Survey . . Average Salary Index for Starting Library Positions, 1957/59-1970 ........ Cost Index of' Hardcover Books, 1957/59-1970 Cost Index of Periodicals, 1957/59-1970 . . vi Page j I 133 I i i 149 | i | 151 | t 153 ! I 153 j 155 ; i 156 i i i ! 159 j i 162 ; 162 I I 164 | I 164 1 | i | 169 j ! 172 | I 172 ! 173 Table Page 29. Preparation of the Library's Annual Budget--Persons or Groups Consulted by the Head Librarian..................... 177 30. Consultation of the Head Librarian by the Administration Prior to Decision Making . . 179 31. Significant Library Advances, 1965-1970 . . 181 32. Basis of the Position of the Head Librarian . 189 33. Selection of the Head Librarian............. 192 34. Appointment of the Head Librarian Searph Committee ......................... 194 35. Composition of the Special Selection Committee........................ 196 36. Appointment of the Head Librarian........... 196 37. Organizational Relationship of the Head Librarian....................... 199 38. Organizational Responsibility of the Head Librarian with Reference to Library Professional Personnel .......... 202 39. Organizational Responsibility of the Head Librarian with Reference to Library Clerical Personnel ............... 204 40. Administrative Status of the Head Librarian . 206 41. Faculty Rank of the Head Librarian......... 208 42. Benefits of Faculty Status Applicable to the Head Librarian........ 210 43. Salaries of Head Librarians on 9-10 Month Contracts in American Public Community Colleges, 1968-69 ............... 213 44. Salaries of Head Librarians on 11-12 Month Contracts in American Public Community Colleges, 1968-69 ......................... 213 vii Table Page j 45. Salaries of Faculty Members in Public j Community Colleges, 1968-69 215 j 46. Highest Level of Academic Achievement | of Head Librarians 217 i 47. Title of the Head Librarian 220 j 48. Distribution of Faculty Senates in Public Community Colleges by Regions and States . 222 j 49. Correlation between the Size of the Faculty i and the Existence of a Faculty Senate at a Community College 224 | 50. Library Representation on the Faculty Senates of Community Colleges ............. 226 51. Selection of the Library Representative on the Faculty Senate ..................... 226 52. Areas in which Administrative Council Advised College President ................. 228 53. Committee Memberships of Head Librarians . . 230 54. Establishment of Friends of the Library Groups ........................... 237 55. Dissemination of Information Concerning the Library to the Board of Trustees . . . 239 56. Selection of the Student Library Committee 241 57. Functions of the Student JLibrary Committee 241 58. Status of the Faculty Library Committee . . . 243 59. Functions of the Faculty Library Committee 245 60. Faculty Library Committee Liaison Services between Faculty and Library Staff ........ 245 61. Involvement of the Faculty Library Committee in Library Development, 1965-1969 ........ 248 viii Table Page 62. Composition of the Faculty Library Committee. 250 63. Position of the Head Librarian on the Faculty Library Committee........ 253 64. Preparation of the Agenda for the Faculty Library Committee ................. 255 65. Faculty Library Committee Membership f * -talif ications ........ 258 66. Selection of i:he Faculty Library Committee . 261 67. Governing Rules of the Faculty Library Committee ......................... 263 68. Length of Term on the Faculty Library Committee ......................... 264 69. Limit of Service on Faculty Library Committee . 265 70. Frequency of Faculty Library Committee Meetings ....................... 266 71. Convening of the Faculty Library Committee . 267 72. Distribution of Faculty Library Committee Minutes ......................... 269 73. Recipients of Faculty Library Committee Recommendations ................. 269 74. Evaluation of the Faculty Library Committee . 271 LIST OF CHARTS Chart 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. Organization Chart ........................... Recommended Line-Staff Organization for Community and Junior Colleges .......... Structure of the Typical Junior College in 1950 Administrative Organizational Chart— Grand Rapids Junior College, 1958-59 . . . . Recommended Organizational Structure for California Junior Colleges for a Student Enrollment of 3,500 ................. Locally Controlled Community College, Less than 1,000 Students ................... State Controlled Community College, Less than 1,000 Students ................... Locally Controlled Community College, 1.000 - 2,499 Students ..................... State Controlled Community College, 1.000 - 2,499 Students ..................... Locally Controlled Community College, 2,500 - 4,999 Students ..................... State and County Controlled Community College, 2,400 - 4,999 Students ............ Locally Controlled Community College, 5.000 - 7,499 Students ..................... State Controlled Community College, 5.000 - 7,499 Students ..................... x Page 99 126 i 127| 129 j i I 132 135! 1 136; 137: 138 i 139 j I 140 I ; i i 141 i j j 142 Chart Page| «' • ' ^ * ’ ■ 14. Locally Controlled Community College, ! 7,500 - 9,999 Students...................... 143j ! 15. Locally Controlled Community College, j 10,000 - 14,999 Students ................... 144! ! 16. Locally Controlled Community College, j Over 15,000 Students......................... 1451 xi CHAPTER I STATEMENT AND DEFINITION OF PROBLEM Statement of the Problem This study was concerned with the place of the library and the head librarian in the administrative and organizational structure of the public community college and the role played by the administration and the faculty in policy making and control. The basic principles of public community college administration and organization were related to public community college library administration and organization. It was the purpose of this investigation to: (l) examine the place of the library within the organizational and administrative structure of the community college and to draw appropriate conclusions; (2) study the relationship between the head librarian and the college administration; (3) determine the relationship between the head librarian and the faculty; (4) examine the role of the faculty in the library’s administration and service; j (5) discuss the advantages and disadvantages that result j from the existing structures and practices; and (6) | provide librarians, administrators, and library school faculties with information concerning typical structures and relationships and an analysis of these patterns of organization. Importance of the Study Five important reasons demonstrate most clearly the need and importance of this investigation: (l) in recent years there has been an unparalleled increase in the number and the size of community colleges; (2) during this time the scope of the community college has expanded from its narrow conception as an upward extension of the secondary school to its expanded functions in liberal, vocational, and adult education; (3) there is an urgent need for the definition and clarification of the role of the library in the organizational structure of the modern community college; (4) despite the phenomenal increase in the number of community colleges and the dramatic restructuring of their roles on the changing educational scene, few research studies have been conducted on the library as an integral element of this comprehensive institution; and (5) during recent years instructional resource centers have been established by an increasing j number of community colleges. Such centers include books j and other printed matter in addition to the widely varied multimedia tools for learning. The use of these tools can ' be facilitated by proper administration. I 3 Limitations of the Study Private junior colleges, extension centers of universities or colleges, high school extension centers, or colleges that are under the control of colleges or universities were not included in this study. Recently mUch emphasis has been placed on the importance of informal organization within the "climate" of a school or college as distinct from formal organiza tion. Although it was recognized that the informal and the formal structures in any administrative organization had complimentary roles and often cannot be separated, this investigation was limited to the study of the formal structure. That there has been a close alliance between formal and informal organization has been suggested by Daniel E. Griffiths, Teachers College, Columbia University: An informal organization is present in every formal organization and is the system of interpersonal relations which forms to affect decisions made in the formal organization. This informal system is omitted from the formal scheme or is in opposition to it. The informal organization is a dynamic structure composed of special interest groups. In the past, the concept has been that of constant change - the informal structure being subject to continual revision as new decisions face the formal organization.1 Devices and processes which relate to the informal structure or the physiology of organization were excluded ^Daniel Edward Griffiths, Administrative Theory (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts^ Inc., 1959), p. 80. 4 from this study. Definitions of Terms Used In order to clarify meanings of some of the key words used throughout the study, authoritative and operational definitions are provided. Academic dean. The official who is in direct charge of the instructional program in a community college. He is responsible to the college president for (a) leading and directing the faculty, (b) nominating to the college president members of the faculty on the recommendation of department chairmen, and (c) appraising the services of faculty members. Academic vice-president. He functions in a capacity similar, if not identical, to that of the academic dean in some of the larger community colleges. Administration. This collective term includes the direction, control, and management of all matters pertaining to college affairs. These include the instruc tional process, programs of studies, curricula, personnel, and business administration. Administrative organization. Administrative organization is the arrangement of administrative personnel by which a specific purpose is accomplished through the allocation of function and responsibilities. John M. Pfiffner, Professor of Public 5 Administration, University of Southern California, writes: Organization consists of a set of relationships: of things to things, jobs to jobs, people to people, groups to groups, processes to processes. Organiza tion is a net work of such relationships, the manner in which people and things are arranged to accomplish a common objective.2 However, as already stated, this study was limited to the formal structure of the administrative organization. An accurate description of the sense in which this term was used is given by Pfiffner: The word structure as used in organization means much the same as in the physical world. It is an arrangement of parts of a grouping, to form an organic whole, which in organization usually takes the shape of a hierarchy. Organization structure is dual in nature, because it is made up of human groupings on one hand and the arrangement of jobs and tasks on the other. There is also an official and a social structure, and in healthy organizations these are not far apart, at least they are not at cross purposes.^ The emphasis is upon the structural hierarchy instead of the human hierarchy. Of course, this does not mean that the writer ignored the social or informal organization and its important relationship to the formal organization. That the importance of the informal structure is strengthened by the formal structure is recognized by Pfiffner, ". . . there is some research to ^John McDonald Pfiffner, Organization— The Study of Hierarchy (Los Angeles: University of Southern California Bookstore, 1959), p. 3. Ibid.. p. 123. indicate that the psychological and social climate is better in those organizations which are well organized in 4 the orthodox sense.u Administrator. Any educational official who is responsible for the management or direction of some unit of an educational establishment. Typically included are such persons as presidents, deans, department heads, and other officials so identified in the study. Business manager. The officer of the college directly responsible for its business affairs but usually subordinate to the president of the college. Chief academic officer. The administrative officer responsible for the formal instructional — r activities of the community college. Titles that designate this officer are academic dean, dean of academic affairs, dean of college, dean of faculty, dean of instruction, director of instruction, director of instruc tional activities, vice-president for instruction, or any other title that indicates responsibility for instructional; activities, curriculum, faculty, and academic affairs. Community college. A two-year, public institution i j of higher education that offers (1) college/university transfer courses, (2) occupational or terminal education of i a technical and semiprofessional nature, (3) adult or j | 4Ibid.. p. 53. I continuing education--of which courses are of a credit and a non-credit character, (4) general education, and (5) guidance and counseling. Control and support are pre ponderantly on the local level. Dean. A major officer of a community college who is responsible, under the president, for the administra tion and supervision of instructional activities, student functions and relations, or administrative services. Faculty. The body of persons responsible for administration and instruction in the community college. Generally, the term refers to the teachers only. Faculty rank. The status of a faculty member in a community college in relation to other staff members of the same educational institution, e.g., professor, associate professor, assistant professor, instructor. Faculty senate. A policy-making or recommending body on a community college campus composed of teachers and non-administrative academic personnel. Friends of the Library. A lay organization that assists in the promotion of libraries of individual community colleges. Often, it purchases equipment and other items that cannot be included in the local budget and provides scholarships for prospective librarians. Head Librarian. The chief administrative officer of the community college library. Instructional personnel. Those who render direct and personal services in the nature of teaching or the improvement of the teaching-learning situation. Junior college. Includes students of the thirteenth and fourteenth grades and those adults and minors who may properly be admitted but are not classifi able by grade. It is more inclusive than the community college. Learning resources. A recent attempt to centralize all learning and multimedia tools for learning for a more efficient administration of these services. "Such centers typically include books and other printed matter as well as various technological aids to learning.""5 Learning resources director. The chief adminis trative officer of the learning resources center. In some of the larger community colleges the head librarian, the head of audiovisual services, and the head of the learning laboratory are administratively responsible to the director of the learning resources center. Librarian. A library staff member who has training and skill in the theoretical or scientific parts of a library’s work, as distinct from its mechanical or routine aspects. This person has usually completed a C -'Bryon Lamar Johnson, Islands of Innovation Expanding: Changes in the Community College (Beverly Hills, California: Glencoe Press, 1969), p. 163. 9 prescribed course of study in an accredited library school. Library committee. A faculty committee (some times there is student representation) to advise the head librarian on matters of policy and board procedure. Organization. The process (or result) of arrang ing interdependent elements into a functional or logical whole. John M. Pfiffner and Frank P. Sherwood, both Professors of Public Administration, University of Southern California, have enlarged upon this definition by saying: Organization is the pattern of ways in which large i numbers of people, too many to have intimate face-to- face contact with all others, and engaged in a complexity of tasks, relate themselves to each other in the conscious, systematic establishment and accom plishment of mutually agreed purposes.6 Personnel manager. The administrative officer in charge of personnel selection, transfer, and dismissal. President. The principal administrative officer of a community college. Role. Role is a function performed by someone or i something in a particular situation, process, or 7 i operation. , In the context of this study, role includes j I j i 6John McDonald Pfiffner and Frank P. Sherwood, j Administrative Organization (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: i Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1960), p. 30. ^Noah Webster, Webster’s Third New International Dictionary of the English Language (Springfield. Massachu- ! setts: G. and C. Merriam Co., 1963), p. 1968. j 1° those duties, functions, and responsibilities carried out by a chief academic officer in the administrative setting of a public community college. Structure. The interrelation of parts or the principle of organization in a complex entity. Trustees. A group of persons responsible for the educational affairs of a community college. Usually they are laymen who select or approve the selection of the professional staff, take action on recommended policies, and assume the ultimate responsibility for financing the work of the community college. Organization of the Study This chapter has covered the scope and importance of the problem being investigated, the limitations of the study, and the definitions of the terms used. Chapter II discusses the background, development, and distinctive nature of the American community college. Chapter III describes the population and the selection of the sample studied, the characteristics of the; colleges included in the investigation, the methods and ! procedures used to develop the questionnaire, the method of: inquiry, and the compilation and analysis of data. Chapter IV summarizes the literature of senior j ' i college and university organization and administration in general and the literature of senior college library j i i ; organization and administration in particular. Then, a similar review is made of the literature of community college organization and administration and community college library organization and administration. This chapter provides basic principles and information on which much of the study is based. Chapter V reviews the general principles of college administration and organization with particular reference to the library and the head librarian. Included ; are such topics as the financial support for library services, the position of the hea“ d librarian in the structure of college organization, the qualifications and responsibilities of the head librarian, the librarian’s rank and status, and committees on the library. Chapter VI identifies the place of the library in the government of American public community colleges. The following concepts and/or relationships are examined: the administrative control of community colleges, the structure of the library, the role of the library, the financial support of the library, the span of control of the head librarian, participation in library affairs by ! administration and faculty, and communication with faculty ! and administration by the head librarian. ! i ( I Chapter VII describes the position of the head j librarian of the American public community college. Such personal and organizational factors are examined as the i 12 legal basis of the position, the librarian's selection and appointment, organizational responsibility, administrative status, faculty rank, title, and participation in campus affairs. Chapter VIII studies the purpose, composition, and accomplishments of the committees that concern the community college library. Such organizations are included as the Friends of the Library, the board of trustees' library committee, the student library committee, and the faculty library committee. Chapter IX summarizes the problem, the research procedures, the conclusions reached from the investigation, and the recommendations for further research. CHAPTER II A PROFILE OF THE AMERICAN COMMUNITY COLLEGE The two-year junior college, often called the community college, is one of the unique innovations in American higher education. It has been called 11. . . the most significant development in American education in the past half century.”' 1 ' Of the several definitions of the community college given by qualified authorities, one of the most suitable has been stated by Leland L. Medsker, Vice-Chairman, Center for the Study of Higher Education, University of California, Berkeley: . . . the comprehensive community college is regarded as one which (l) offers a variety of educational programs of an academic and an occupational nature, day and evening, for full-time and part-time students, (2) provides an opportunity for students to make up educational deficiencies, (3) has a liberal admission policy, (4) emphasizes a well-developed guidance ; program, (5) performs a variety of special services to : the community, and (6) insists on its right to dignity • » xClyde E. Blocker, Robert H. Plummer, and Richard j C. Richardson, Jr., The Two-Year College: A Social j Synthesis (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, j Inc., 1965), p. 1. | 13 j on its own merits without attempting to resemble a four-year college. By adapting itself to the peculiar conditions and needs of twentieth century American society, the community college has brought the opportunity for higher learning to | the door of each prospective student. The idea of the public community college movement had its birth in the American cultural, economic, and political heritage and ”... fed and grew on such concepts as equal opportunity for all and the desire to eliminate financial, geographi- Q cal, and social barriers to higher education.” With its numerous functions and characteristics the community college is a very complex institution. ”No unit of American higher education is expected to serve such a diversity of purposes, to provide such a variety of ; educational instruments, or to distribute students among so many types of educational programs as the junior college."^ While admitting the worthy motives of the community college and its sense of mission, Robert Maynard j Hutchins, formerly President and Chancellor of the | i 2 Leland L. Medsker, The Junior College; Progress and Prospect (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1960), p. 203. i Michael Brick, Forum and Focus for the Junior College Movement (New York: Columbia University, Teachers College, Bureau of Publications, 1964), p. 26. 4 Medsker, op. cit.. p. 4. 15 University of Chicago but more recently identified with the Center for Democratic Institutions, recognized the community college's unique essence of contradiction while commenting upon the report of the President's Commission on Higher Education: It is confused, confusing, and contradictory. It has something for everybody. It is generous, ignoble, bold, timid, naive and optimistic. It is filled with the spirit of universal brotherhood and the sense of American superiority. It has great faith in money. It has great faith in courses. It is antihumanistic and antiintellect ual. It is confident that vices can be turned into virtues by making them larger. Its heart is in the right place; its head does not work very well.-5 Beginning with a single institution in Joliet, Illinois, in 1902,^ this educational movement has exper ienced phenomenal growth. Within thirty years the number of junior colleges had grown to 400, and by 1952 the total had increased to 594. There are now approximately 1,100 public and private junior colleges located in all the n states except South Dakota. ^In: Bert Schwartz, "The Burgeoning Community College: Is It Really Higher Education," Saturday Review, j XLVII (December 19, 1964), 52. ^Some sources favor 1901 as the founding date, e. g., Elbert K. Fretwell, Jr., Founding Junior Colleges: j Local Initiative in Six Communities (New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1954), p. 11. | ^There is no evidence that this omission will be j remedied soon. I 16 This development is dramatically summarized in Tables 1 and 2. Enrollment data during these years are given in Table 1 while Table 2 indicates the comparative number of institutions for the selected years. Not only is the significant increase of students seen, but the increasing importance of the public junior college is clearly shown. As is true of the majority of institutions of higher education, the community college is no longer typically small. Whereas the mean average enrollment was 31 in 1915/16 and 342 in 1933/34, by 1969/70 it had increased to approximately 2,500. Not only did the number of junior colleges and their enrollments increase significantly during the past half-century, but the percentage of the total under graduate enrollment carried by the junior colleges increased. Whereas in 1930, approximately 6 percent of the undergraduate students were enrolled in junior colleges, by 1969 20 percent were so enrolled. The development of the junior college has been traced in four distinct time periods by Tyrus Hillway, g Professor of Education, Colorado State College. In the Preparatory Period, 1850-1900, the idea of the nation’s 8Tyrus Hillway, The American Two-Year College (New York: Harper & Bros., 1958), pp. 40-43. 17 Table 1 ENROLLMENT GROWTH IN JUNIOR COLLEGES 1915-1970 Year Total Public Private Percent Public 1915-16 2,363 592 1,771 25 1925-26 35,630 20,145 15,485 57 1933-34 107,807 74,853 32,952 69 1938-39 196,710 140,545 56,165 71 1947-48 500,536 378,844 121,692 76 1952-53 560,732 489,563 71,169 87 1961-62 748,619 644,968 103,651 86 1969-70 2,227.5,14 2,103,473 124,041 94 Table 2 UNIT GROWTH OF JUNIOR 1915-1970 COLLEGES Year Total Public Private Percent Public 1915-16 74 19 55 26 1925-26 325 136 189 42 1933-34 531 219 302 41 1938-39 575 258 317 45 1947-48 651 328 323 50 1952-53 594 327 267 55 1961-62 678 405 273 60 1969-70 1,076 842 234 78 18 : universities was modified and the first two years of higher education were duplicated in a separate institution. However, there had been no initial intention to establish the junior college as a separate educational unit, the single purpose being to duplicate the first two years of the standard college curriculum. The Formative Period, 1900-1920, saw the junior college take definite shape and was climaxed by the establishment of the American Association of Junior Colleges'.® The junior colleges established during this period followed different patterns: (1) some were extensions of the academic work of high schools or academies and were under local school board control; (2) others were new institutions formed by changing some four- year colleges to two-year colleges; and (3) some were founded as separate two-year colleges. The Period of Diversification, 1920-1940, was characterized by emphases on adult education, business education, and vocational education. During these two decades the development of two-year colleges continued at a rapid pace, which was marked by two new characteristics: (1) the publicly supported junior colleges took a j i commanding lead in student enrollment, probably for ‘ ! ^In 1972 the name was changed to American Association of Community and Junior Colleges. 19 economic reasons; and (2) many institutions that specialized in vocational and adult education entered the field. Initially the junior colleges imitated the first two years of university work; however, during this period institutions of various types were founded. For example, many had been in existence as business and trade schools; these assumed academic.respectability as they called them selves junior colleges and required graduation from high school as a prerequisite for admission. From 1940 to the present, the junior college has been evolving into the Period of the Community College. Inasmuch as this was approximately the time that the community-serving function of the two-year college was receiving wide recognition and acceptance, the period after 1945 can be regarded as the real beginning point for the community college. As a distinctive institution, the community college has attempted to provide several diversified functions: 1. To prepare students for upper division instruction in four-year colleges and universities. In this academic transfer function the community college differs least from other colleges and universities. The prediction has been made that by the dawn of the 21st century many liberal arts colleges and universities will have discontinued their two-year undergraduate programs, 20 and lower-division education will be the responsibility of the community college."^ However, this has been the goal of several large universities for more than a century. Henry Tappan, President of the University of Michigan, first proposed this idea in the 1850's. Other university presidents who advocated such action were William Folwell of the University of Minnesota and William Rainey Harper of the University of Chicago. In such a bifurcated university the first two years of college work would be relegated to the secondary schools, and the university would begin its work with the junior year. As a result of the failure to secure the adoption of this plan, many universities eventually divided the undergraduate program into two halves— lower and upper division. Some universi ties, e.g., Indiana and Purdue, opposed the establishment of junior colleges within their states. They desired to retain the almost exclusive control of higher education for themselves. Only after the establishment of branch campuses, did such universities permit the adoption of legislation that authorized the creation of junior colleges. 2., To provide terminal curricula up to two years in length in vocational and technical education. The •^Alvin C. Eurich, "Higher Education in the 21st Century," Atlantic Monthly, CCXI (June, 1963), 51-55. community college as a multipurpose institution trains students for employment in technical jobs and semi- professional positions. The student who plans to enter full-time employment upon leaving the junior college can avail himself of the segment of the curriculum that is responsible for the impartation of the needed vocational skills and understanding. The opportunity to use this knowledge in a year or two instead of the unclear future has motivated many students. During recent years employ ment opportunities for technicians have been greater than for others. 3. To give general education for all students, whether preparatory or terminal. Although there has been no agreement on the nature of general education, in recent years it has been given a behavioral emphasis which defines it as ". . . that education which prepares a man to live more fully as a person and more effectively as a citizen."^ However, even after decades of debate, there is no unanimity on the nature of general education. It means a common basic curriculum to some; to others it means that a fundamental educational experience leads to common outcomes, i.e., different means may lead to the same ends. To some, instead of emphasizing the content of narrow disciplines, it stresses the concepts, principles, ■^Medsker, op. cit.« pp. 56-57. 22 and methodologies of the major fields of knowledge. 4. To aid students by effective guidance to make educational and vocational choices consistent with their academic capabilities and individual characteristics. Such counseling efforts will be expended on students while they are still in high school and before their arrival on the college campus, will continue during the time that they are on the campus, and will be available after they graduate or leave the institution. Every comprehensive community college must perform its'-'functions as an open- door institution by offering skilled, professional student personnel services. 5. To offer general and special courses for adults in a broad educational range. The community college will organize classes for adults when and where they are needed, i.e., from early morning until late evening and on and off campus. Objectives of community residents may vary greatly, but the college should always be ready to respond to meet the needs in an organized way. Although there appears to be general agreement that the majority of the students who attend community colleges | I Are somewhat unlike the students who attend senior colleges: I and universities, it is well to note that they resemble 12 other college students more than they differ. As first j i i _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ j ^Blocker, Plummer, & Richardson, op. cit.. p. 240. j generation college goers, they often have ambitious goals but are uncertain of the means by which these worthy objectives can be achieved. Edmund J. Gleazer, Jr., Executive Director, American Association of Junior Colleges, observes: . . . . They work part time not so often on the college campus as in stores, plants, service stations and on farms in areas where they live. They do not return to college residence halls between classes. They go home, or to the parking lot, or to a job in the community. And at night, they return to the residence in which they lived during their high school days - to the same family they have known through the years - to the same system of relationships with church, family, other families and other community institutions.13 Thus when compared with students in senior colleges and universities, community college students are particularly notable for their diversity. The educational task of the institution is complicated by the diverse nature of the community college student body, thereby becoming in some respects the most challenging and demand ing task in higher education. The following conclusions have been reached with reference to these students by Ralph R. Fields, Professor of Higher Education, Teachers College, Columbia University: •^Edmund j. Gleazer, Jr., "The Stake of the Junior College in Its Library," College and Research Libraries, i XXVII (July, 1966), 264. 1. Some community college students are as able academically as those in the freshman and sopho more years of typical four-year colleges; however they constitute a smaller proportion of the total group. 2. The community college type of institution accepts and attracts students not ordinarily attracted to or generally admitted to the other types of colleges. 3. There is, therefore, a greater academic heterogen eity in the student body of the junior college. 4. Community colleges also attract a more representa tive group of students with respect to socio economic status. 5. Community colleges attract students with a greater age range than the typical four-year institution Ideally, the specific needs of community colleges and their student bodies can be met most effectively by teaching staffs that have received specific training and understand and accept the function of the public community college. To date, however, senior colleges and universities have done little toward providing such needed instruction for community college instructors. "The majority of junior college instructors have been recruited from the ranks of experienced high school teachers, only a few directly from university or college."’ 1 '^ •*-^Ralph R. Fields, The Community College Movement (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1962) , pp. 80-81. For a more complete description of community college students, see Medsker, op. cit.. pp. 29-50. l5Ibid.. p. 332. 25 According to the study by James W. Thornton, Jr.,"^ Professor of Education, San Jose State College, the following faults are often evidenced among community college teachers: (l) class preparations are too narrow and specialized, (2) the subject or content point of view is stressed instead of the learning view of the students, (3) a balanced preparation is lacking, (4) experience is almost non-existent, and (5) community college objectives are not known or are misunderstood and there is often a lack of sympathy with these objectives. The problem is further complicated by the prefer ence of approximately one-half of the instructors for 17 teaching in a senior college. Also, many faculty members disagree with such features of the community college philosophy as remedial work, adult education, vocational training, and the community service function. In order to reach most effectively the diversified abilities, interests, and aspirations of the students, the community college library must provide relevant, imaginative, and innovative approaches that make use of the latest educational techniques and equipment. The basic texts and lectures must be supplanted 1 /? James W. Thornton, Jr., The Community Junior College. Second Edition (New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1966), pp. 136-137. 17 Medsker, op. cit.. p. 175. and/or supplemented by a more extensive use of the library in order to extend the students1 learning beyond the confines of the classroom. W. Wiley Scott, Catalog Librarian, Albion (Michigan) College, suggests: The college library exists for the purpose of aiding the college in the fulfillment of its objectives. In this respect, the library serves the college in three ways; as a teaching agency, as a materials center, and as a reading and study center. 8 Not only must the community college library meet the needs of the students who are enrolled for two years, it must also serve those who register for only a few courses or who become professional students. Wiley Scott, "The Library's Place in the Junior College,” Library Trends. XIV (October, 1965), 186. j CHAPTER III METHOD OF RESEARCH PROCEDURE This chapter describes the population and selection of the sample, chracteristics of the college, development of the questionnaire, procedure used in securing the data, compilation of the data, and analysis of the data. Definition of the Population and Selection of the Sample Inasmuch as this study was limited to regionally accredited, public community colleges with comprehensive educational programs, the decision was made to use the current Junior College Directory^ of the American Associa tion of Junior Colleges as an aid in determining authorita tively whether a community college met the requirements for inclusion. Also consulted were such recognized reference 2 sources as Accredited Institutions of Higher Education, | 1Junior College Directory (Washington, D. C.: American Association of Junior Colleges, 1969). j 2 * Accredited Institutions of Higher Education. j February. 1970 (Washington, D. C. : American Council on j Education, 1970). j American Junior Colleges, and the membership directories of the six regional accrediting associations in the United 4 States. This procedure yielded 467 public community colleges with the characteristics desired for this study. The community colleges included in this investigation had these comprehensive academic programs: college and university transfer education, occupational-technical education, general education, adult or continuing, education, and guidance services. Characteristics of the Colleges Usable questionnaires were returned by 257 public community colleges, or 55 percent. The largest numbers were from the Southern, Western, and North Central regional accrediting associations. The numbers from the Middle States and the Northwest areas were considerably smaller, and there were only four respondents from the New England region. Table 3 indicates that only 33, or 13 percent, of the reporting colleges were in the large •^American Council on Education. American Junior Colleges. Seventh Edition (Washington, D. C.: The j Council, 1967). I 4 • ■ They are: Middle States Association of Colleges j and Secondary Schools, New England Association of Collegesj and Secondary Schools, North Central Association of Col leges and Secondary Schools, Northwest Association of Se- condary and Higher Schools, Southern Association of Col leges and Schools, and Western Association of Schools and I Colleges. ] Table 3 PUBLIC COMMUNITY COLLEGES LISTED BY REGION AND FULL-TIME STUDENT ENROLLMENT Region Under 1,000 1, 2, 000 499 2, 4, 500- 999 5, 7r 000- 499 7,500- 9,999 Over 10,000 Total Colleqes No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % Middle States 3 10 16 55 8 28 2 7 - - - - 29 11 New England 2 50 2 50 4 2 North Central 18 33 24 44 9 17 3 6 - - - - 54 21 Northwest 6 26 10 43 6 26 1 4 - - - - 23 9 Southern 34 43 29 36 11 14 3 4 2 2 1 1 80 31 Western 5 7 17 25 24 36 12 18 5 7 4 6 67 26 Total 68 98 58 21 7 5 257 Percent of Total 26 38 23 8 3 2 100 to VO 30 category, i.e., institutions with full-time student enrollments of 5,000 or over. Included were 5 institu tions, or 2 percent, with enrollments over 10,000. Of these, 4 were members of the Western accrediting associa tion, and 1 was associated with the Southern association. Medium-sized colleges with full-time enrollments of 2,500 - 4,999 numbered 58 institutions, or 23 percent of the total. Small institutions with under 2,500 full-time students totalled 166, or 65 percent of the total. Of the latter group 68, or 26 percent, had enrollments of under 1,000. With two exceptions the statistics were similar when based on part-time student enrollments. Table 4 shows that only 35, or 14 percent, were medium sized colleges with part-time enrollments of 2,500 - 4,999. However, small institutions with enrollments of under 2,500 now totalled 179, or 73 percent. Of the latter group 126, or 52 percent, had part-time enrollments of under 1,000. A comparison of college characteristics by region and size demonstrated that Western colleges were large institutions with more than 5,000 full-time students in 21j i cases, or 31 percent of the total. By way of contrast, there were only 6 such Southern institutions, or 8 percent I of the total. The majority of the middle States, New j England, North Central, Northwest, and Southern colleges were in the small-sized category with percentages of 66, Table 4 PUBLIC COMMUNITY COLLEGES LISTED BY REGION AND PART-TIME STUDENT ENROLLMENT Region Under 1,000 1, 2 ? 000 499 2, 4, 500- 999 5, 7, 000- 499 7, 9, 500- 999 Over 10,000 Total Colleges No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % Middle States 9 31 12 41 5 17 1 3 2 7 - - 29 12 New England 3 75 1 25 4 2 North Central 30 58 11 21 7 13 3 6 1 2 - - 52 21 Northwest 13 62 4 19 2 10 - - 2 10 - - 21 9 Southern 56 77 10 14 3 4 3 4 1 1 - - 73 30 Western 15 23 15 23 18 27 11 17 4 6 3 5 66 27 Total 126 53 35 18 10 3 245 Percent of Total 51 22 14 7 4 1 100 32 100, 78, 70, and 79, respectively. However, the largest group of Western colleges, 24 institutions, or 36 percent of the total, were medium-sized. Table 5 gives the date of founding of these public community colleges as listed by the several regional accrediting associations. Table 6 classifies the colleges by age and size. A total of 119 colleges, or 46 percent, had been operating for twenty years or more. Regional variations were clearly evident in this comparison. The majority of the North Central and Western colleges, 63 and 64 percent, respectively, had been operating twenty years or more. On the other hand, the percentages were, consider-i ably lower for Middle States, Northwest, and Southern colleges with figures of 31, 30, and 32 percent, respectively. All four of the reporting institutions in the New England region had been operating less than ten years. Of particular interest was the observation that the majority of institutions within the Middle States, Northwest, and Southern regions had been founded within the past ten years; these percentages were 52, 65, and 58, j respectively. ! j That there was little apparent relation between the size of colleges and the number of years that they had ! operated is clear from an inspection of Table 6. Small institutions had been operating for twenty years or more in 45 percent of the cases, and 42 percent of the medium- j Table 5 PROFILE OF COMMUNITY COLLEGES BY DATE OF FOUNDING Region Before 1900 1900- 1909 1910- 1919 1920- 1929 1930- 1939 1940- 1949 1950- 1959 1960- Total 1969 Colleges No. % No. % No.. % No.. % No. . % No.. % No.. % No. % No. % Middle States - - 2 7 3 10 - - - - 4 14 5 17 15 52 29 11 New England 4 100 4 2 North Central 2 4 3 6 6 11 12 22 6 11 5 9 7 13 13 24 54 21 Northwest - - - - 1 4 1 4 4 17 1 4 1 4 15 65 23 9 Southern - - - - 2 2 11 14 7 8 6 7 7 9 47 59 80 31 Western _ 10 15 18 27 5 7 10 15 8 12 16 24 67 26 Total 2 5 22 42 22 26 28 110 257 Percent of Total 1 2 9 16 9 10 11 43 100 to to Table 6 YEARS COMMUNITY COLLEGES IN OPERATION ARRANGED BY SIZE OF COLLEGE Size 1-•10 11-20 21-■30 31-40 41-■50 51-60 i H VO 70 70 vrsi. + Total No. % No. % No . % No. % No . % No. % No. % No. % No. % Under 1,000 43 63 4 6 2 3 5 7 10 15 1 1 2 3 1 1 68 26 1,000-2,499 32 33 13 13 14 14 10 10 14 14 11 11 3 3 1 1 98 38 2,500-4,999 25 43 9 16 5 9 5 9 8 14 6 10 - - - - 58 23 5,000-7,499 9 43 1 5 1 5 1 5 7 33 2 10 - - - - 21 8 7,500-9,999 1 14 1 14 2 29 1 14 1 14 1 14 - - - - 7 3 More than 10,000 — - — — 2 40 — - 2 40 1 20 — - — — 5 2 Total 110 28 26 22 42 22 5 2 257 Percent of Total 43 11 10 9 16 9 2 1 lOO 00 35 sized colleges had been operating for this period of time. There appeared to be a difference in the large-sized colleges in that 64 percent of them had been operating for twenty years or more. The percentages were considerably lower for large-sized colleges that had been operating one to ten years and eleven to twenty years— 30 and 6 percent, respectively. The characteristics of the 257 public community colleges in the study can be summarized thus: (l) they were usually small to medium in size; (2) they were located primarily in the Southern, Western, and North Central regional accrediting association areas; and (3) they had been operating, in just under one-half of the cases, for twenty years or more. In comparison with other institutions of higher education, the majority of these colleges appeared young and small. However, the majority were reaching a considerable degree of maturity if the relative newness of the community college movement is considered. Development of the Questionnaire The questionnaire (Appendix D) was developed by j i the author after a review of the literature of college and ' university organization and administration, an examination j of library administrative practices and procedures, and research pertaining to the operation of the various | 36 services generally found in academic libraries. The items composing the questionnaire were developed to obtain information relating to the following major areas of research concern: 1. General information. Included were queries concerning the age and the current enrollment of the college. 2. Head librarian. Included were items related to the position of the head librarian in the organization and administration of the college, his selection and appointment, his committee memberships, and his adminis trative or faculty status. 3. Faculty library committee. Included were items related to the selection, membership, functions, and other characteristics of the faculty library committee. Additional concerns of this investigation were the influence of the college administration upon the operation of the library, the place of audio-visual services on a college campus, and the identification of the existence, composition, and function of such groups as faculty senates, student library committees, and Friends of the Library. Changes resulting from criticisms and recommenda tions of the writer's guidance committee and from interviews with several community college librarians increased the clarity and effectiveness of the final 37 questionnaire, which is presented in Appendix D. j Procedure of Requesting Data The questionnaire was mailed on June 15, 1970, to the head librarians of 467 public community colleges in the United States. Included was a cover letter (Appendix C) asking for their cooperation and assistance, along with a stamped, addressed envelope. A follow-up post card (Appendix E) was sent on July 29 to those who had not returned the questionnaires. Additional copies of the questionnaire were sent to the head librarians of 218 colleges that had not responded by August 26. A cover letter (Appendix F) and a return enveloped were again included. When finally tabulated on November 1, completed questionnaires totalled 287, an overall return of 61.46 percent. Of these, 257 were found to be usable. Thirty had to be discarded because the institutions either were not accredited by the appropriate regional accreditation association or were not community colleges as defined in the questionnaire. Compilation of Data The questionnaire was designed so that most questions could be answered by checking one specific answer from among several possible choices. However, in Table 7 DISTRIBUTION OF QUESTIONNAIRES TO 467 COMMUNITY COLLEGE LIBRARIES AND THE RESPONSE BY REGIONS AND STATES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Reqion and State No. of Colleges Receivinq No. Colleges Respondinq No. Reported not Applicable Middle States 59 35 & Delaware 1 0 Maryland 10 5 New Jersey 5 3 1 New York 23 16 Pennsylvania 20 11 5 New Enqland 10 4 Massachusetts 9 4 Rhode Island 1 0 North Central 111 69 15 Arizona 6 4 Arkansas 1 1 1 Colorado 5 3 1 Illinois 23 11 2 Indiana 1 1 Iowa 8 6 Kansas 6 4 1 Michigan 17 13 Minnesota 5 2 Missouri 7 4 Nebraska 1 1 North Dakota 2 1 Ohio 4 3 2 Oklahoma 4 2 Kansas U ** Michigan 17 13 Minnesota 5 2 Missouri 7 4 Nebraska 1 1 North Dakota 2 1 Ohio 4 3 Oklahoma 4 2 Wisconsin 18 11 Wyoming 3 2 Northwest 44 24 Alaska 6 1 Idaho 2 1 Montana 3 1 Nevada 1 1 Oregon 9 6 Utah 5 2 Washington 18 12 Southern 154 87 Alabama 12 6 Florida 26 16 Georgia 9 7 Kentucky io 6 Mississippi 16 5 North Carolina 19 10 South Carolina 10 3 Tennessee 4 2 Texas 40 25 Virginia 9 7 Western 89 68 California 85 66 Hawaii 4 2 Total 467 287 30 H|H MH H C O c m H|H Alaska Idaho Montana Nevada Oregon Utah Washington Southern Alabama Florida Georgia Kentucky Mississippi North Carolina South Carolina Tennessee Texas Virginia Western California Hawaii Total 6 2 3 1 9 5 18 154 12 26 9 10 16 19 10 4 40 9 89 85 4 7 1 1 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 2 12 87 6 16 7 6 5 10 3 2 25 7 68 66 2 467 287 30 some cases a total inventory response was desired. A master card allowed the choices by the respondents to be mark-sensed for later manipulation by International Business Machines computer, Model 360. Analysis of Data After all data had been produced on punched cards, totals and percentages were derived for all choices on each question on the questionnaire. Then the data were analyzed by regional accrediting associations and by the size of the colleges. The numbers and percentages could be determined for each of the six regions as well as their combined numbers and percentages. Comparisons were carried out to determine whether variations existed between different regions and various-sized colleges. In general, total responses were examined without considera tion as to the differences between the several regions. Summary This problem was considered significant for the purpose of research because of the increasing importance of the public community college on the American educational scene and because there has been no comparable study of the library within this organizational structure. Regionally accredited, public community colleges with comprehensive educational programs were selected as the best possible 40 group for a study of this nature since they have attained a maturity and a stature which are not possible for newly established of single-purpose institutions. The questionnaire was developed in such a manner as to ascertain such information as historical data on the college, present practices at the college and in the library, and an understanding of the legal and functional position of the library and the head librarian in the college organization. In soliciting the assistance of the head librarians of the selected institutions, procedures were established and follow-up techniques were developed to secure the highest percentage of responses possible. Of the 467 questionnaires distributed to the head librarians of public community colleges throughout the United States, 287, or 61 percent, were returned. Of these, 257, or 55 percent, were usable for this study. The manner in which the data were organized for identification and organiza tion in subsequent analyses was described. CHAPTER IV REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE Senior College and University Organization and Administration Despite some evident differences in organization and administration between community colleges and senior colleges and universities, there are some basic similari ties. Therefore, this review begins with a limited examination of the rather extensive literature^ of the administration of higher education. A consideration of those studies uniquely limited to the community college 2 follows. The library was mentioned in a significant manner in only a limited number of the better-known texts in the field. In her then relevant but now dated study, 3 Harriet A. Wise, a cataloger at the Detroit Public Karl Worth Bigelow (ed.), Selected Books for the College and University Administrator (New York: Columbia University, Teachers College, Bureau of Publications, 1958). 2Infra, pp. 60-69. Q Harriet A. Wise, "A Study of the Treatment of the College Library in General Books on College Administration” (unpublished M. A. thesis, Western Reserve University, School of Library Service, 1949). 41 Library, found that only 23 of the 53 titles examined actually discussed the library and usually in only a few pages. 4 5 Most recent texts, e.g., Corson, Henderson, Hungate, and Woodburne, make little, if any, reference to the place of the library in the academic institution. Likewise, there are but fragmentary statements concerning the library and its personnel in such books as those by O Q Burns0 and Ayers and Russel. There are, however, some notable exceptions. An entire chapter on the college 4john Jay Corson, Governance of Colleges and Universities (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1960). 5 Algo Donmyer Henderson, Policies and Practices in Higher Education (New York: Harper & Bros., 1960), p. 264. Thad Lewis Hungate, Management in Higher Education (New York: Columbia University, Teachers College, Bureau of Publications, 1964). 7 Lloyd Stuart Woodburne, Principles of College and University Administration (Stanford, California: Stanford University Press, 1958). ®Gerald P. Burns (ed.), Administrators in Higher Education: Their Functions and Coordination (New York: Harper & Bros., 1962). 9Archie Raymond Ayers and John Hamilton Russel, Internal Structure: Organization and Administration of Institutions of Higher Education (Washington, D.C.: Govern ment Printing Office, 1962). 43 library was included in the work edited by Deferrari,"^ which is a collection of the speeches delivered at the 1946 Catholic University of American Workshop on Problems of Ad ministration in the American College. In the report of the 1955 Workshop, again edited by Deferrari, ■ L1 a chapter pre sented some aspects of college library administration. Following his observation that no comment was need ed concerning the recognized importance of a library to an academic community, John D. Millett, President, Miami University, added these words: . . . . There are some very real issues, however, to be resolved in library administration. Ideally, the library function is closely related to the academic ob jectives of a particular college or university. At the same time, library management has become a professional specialty in the academic community. . . . 13 Thomas E. Blackwell, formerly Vice Chancellor, I Phillips Temple, "The College Library," College Organization and Administration (ed.) Roy Joseph Deferrari (Washington, D. C.: Catholic University of America, 1947), pp. 263-281. II Eugene P. Willging, "Some Aspects of College Library Administration," The Problems of Administration in the American College (ed.) Roy Joseph Deferrari (Washing ton, D. C.: Catholic University of America Press, 1956), pp. 123-139. 12 John David Millett, The Academic Community: An Essay on Organization (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1962), p. 216. 13Thomas Edward Blackwell, College and University Administration (New York: The Center for Applied Research in Education, 1966),pp. 45-55. 44 Washington University, included an entire chapter on library administration; this was most unusual. He discussed, but not in depth, such topics as: (l) the evolution of library administration, (2) the functions of the modern college library, (3) administrative organiza tion, (4) the duties of the librarian, (5) the library committee, (6) the functional organization of the library, (7) an organization based upon subject matter, (8) financial administration, (9) library personnel, and (10) library cooperation. Other books concerned themselves with such aspects of academic organization and administration as the chief administrative officer of the institution, the financial considerations at the college, and the boards of trustees. However, only a few of them mentioned the position of the library within the administrative framework of the institution. While serving as the Executive Director of the Commission on Financing Higher Education, John D. 14 Millett was an obvious exception. He stressed the im portance of adequate library expenditures in the total educational budget of a college or university. The importance of the appointment of a capable librarian with i responsibility and authority was suggested by Raymond M. 14 John David Millett, Financing Higher Education in; the United States (New York: Columbia University Press, 1952). ' | 45 jHughes,^ President, Iowa State College, as typical of highj ! : ! !caliber administration. The responsibility of the adminis- | 1 ' 1 i ) !tration to provide libraries that would facilitate instruc- j j | !tional activities in universities and colleges was mention-i |ed by Harold C. Hand, Professor of Education, University of j I Illinois : \ .... Libraries built and equipped to integrate i instruction with source materials of all sorts and to make the instructor easily available to the library situation through provision of work rooms and faculty j offices in the library building are helpful. The best j ; results in the design of libraries recently constructed; . . . have been achieved when liberal use has been made j of faculty committees in the planning stages.16 j J In 1970, Asa S. Knowles,^ President, Northeastern University, edited a most prodigious handbook on the admin- jistration of colleges and universities. In preparation ; I for four years, the handbook recognized the following j educational realities: (1) there is a wide spectrum of i administrative responsibilities, (2 ) the top administrator must be given an overall view of the operating and j administrative problems for which he has general responsi- j bility, and (3) those immediately responsible for various | 1^Raymond Mollyneaux Hughes, A Manual for Trustees. Third Edition (Ames, Iowa: Collegiate Press, 1961), p. 108. l^Harold C. Hand, "Practices in Determining Institu tional Objectives," Democracy in the Administration of Higher Education (ed.) Harold Benjamin (10th Yearbook of the ;John Dewey Society; New York: Harper & Bros.,1950),pp.103-4. •^Asa Smallidge Knowles (ed.), Handbook of College l and University Administration (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1970). operations must know what is considered good administra tive practice. The handbook was planned for newly appointed and experienced administrators in institutions of all sizes and types. Chapters on the following library 1 8 topics were included: (l) library associations, (2) library organization and administration, (3) the library building, and (4) the future library. Senior College and University Library Administration and Organization Although relatively scant attention to the position of the library in the administrative framework has been given in recognized texts and related works on the organization and administration of higher education, there have been numerous and valuable publications on library administration within the academic structure. Modern academic library administration has been served long and well by the wisdom of William M. Randall and Francis Goodrich in their landmark study, Principles of College Library Administration. This classic work was based upon data secured during the surveys of college libraries made for the Carnegie Corporation of New York, the General Education Board, the Board of Education of the Methodist Episcopal Church, the North Central Association, ^ Ibid., Chapters 2-5. 47 19 20 and other similar groups. In their first and second editions, Randall, Professor of Library Science, University of Chicago, and Goodrich, Librarian and Professor, College of the City of New York, set forth specified principles that could be applied in the adminis tration of the liberal arts college library. The work was a comprehensive statement of the nature of the modern college library, what it should attempt to do, and how it should seek to accomplish its goal. This was the first and for years the only general work that covered the whole field of college library administration with a thorough discussion of the roles of the president, faculty, and librarian. During recent years probably the most complete and dependable study of the organization, administration, and functions of the American university library were the 21 22 first and second editions of the text, The University 19 William Madison Randall and Francis Goodrich, Principles of College Library Administration (Chicago: American Library Association and University of Chicago Press, 1936). 20 William Madison Randall and Francis Goodrich, Principles of College Library Administration. Second Edition (Chicago: American Library Association and Uni versity of Chicago Press, 1941). 2lLouis Round Wilson and Maurice Falcolm Tauber, The University Library (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1949). 22Louis Round Wilson and Maurice Falcolm Tauber, Library, by Louis R. Wilson and Maurice F. Tauber, who were, respectively, Professor of Library Science, University of North Carolina, and Melvil Dewey Professor of Library Service, Columbia University. Such standard topics as services and functions and administration and organization received adequate and thorough coverage in this outstanding work. An equally valuable and comparable work, The Administration of the College Library, by Guy R. 2q Lyle, Director of Libraries, Emory (Georgia) University, dealt with the philosophy, principles, and problems of modern college library administration. Initial editions in 1944 and 1949 were followed by the third edition in 1961. The most up-to-date contribution to contemporary university library administration, University Library Administration. was written in 1971 by Rutherford Rogers OA, and David C. Weber, Librarian, Yale University, and Director of Libraries, Stanford University, respectively. These authorit-ies on university library administration produced a most valuable treatise on such important topics The University Library. Second Edition (New York: Columbia University Press, 1956). 2^Guy Redvers Lyle, The Administration of the College Library. Third Edition (New York: H. W. Wilson Co?, 1961). OA. Rutherford David Rogers and David Carter Weber, University Library Administration (New York: H. W. Wilson Co., 1971). 49 as personnel, library organization, budgeting and fiscal management, book collections, technical services, readers' services, special collections, measurement and evaluation, automation, and the planning of library buildings. Scores of additional authors merited inclusion in this brief historical survey of the literature of college and university library administration. In his interesting landmark study, Teaching with Books: A Study of College 25 Libraries, published in 1940, Harvie Branscomb, Director of Libraries and Chairman, Division of Ancient Languages and Literatures, Duke University, presented an investiga tion of college libraries that emphasized the concept of teaching with books. Without attempting to have the library director or the other librarians dodge their recognized and assigned duties, he asserted that the college president was the person ultimately responsible for the conduct and character of the library. He continued: . . . . If he C the president] would secure the fullest education returns from his college library, there are three specific services which he must render it, besides providing adequate financial support. These are (a) to take the lead in clarifying . . . the kind of library program which the college wants,'(b) to select the librarian qualified to direct that service, j and (3) to see to it that in the organization of the j college the librarian is not separated from, but rathefj is brought into vital relationship to, the educational j 25 Harvie Branscomb, Teaching with Books; A Study | of College Libraries (Hamden, Connecticut: Shoe String j Press, 1964, cl940). | 50 program. In most colleges this will mean elevating the status of the librarian.2^ Although now somewhat dated since it was written in 1949, Elizabeth Kientzle's thesis, Study of Relation ships among College and University Administrators. Library 27 Committees and Librarians. was an important examination of the relationships that exist in the administration of college and university libraries. Miss Kientzle, Assistant Librarian, Liberal Arts Library, De Paul (Illinois) University, included a description of the acti vities of the administrator, the library committee, and the librarian in their relationship to the college library. In 1950 Martha Biggs, Librarian, Lake Forest (Illinois) College, suggested in her paper, Codifying College Library Policy, that a written code of college library policy was highly desirable. However, she recogni zed that conclusions could not be made as to the selection of one form of a policy instead of another form since the trend toward the acceptance of written codes was relatively new. She continued: . . . . The planning of such a policy must be the result of much investigation, a careful study of the aims and policies of the institution as well as of the 26Ibid.. p. 84. 27 • 1 ^'Elizabeth Kientzle, "Study of Relationships among; College and University Administrators, Library Committees ! and Librarians" (unpublished M. A. thesis, University of Chicago, 1949). j 51 charter and by-laws under which it operates. It should be undertaken as a guide to the librarian, with the approval and cooperation of the president, and should be flexible enough to meet the changing needs of the college, but should not be considered as a final and irrevocable rule.^8 29 Robert B. Downs, Director of Libraries, Univer sity of Illinois, in 1952 edited an entire issue of t h e'' ' periodical, Library Trends, which was concerned with the contemporary trends in college and university libraries. 30 The contribution by Donald Coney, Librarian, University of California (Berkeley), entitled Management in College and University Libraries, was representative of the entire issue in which the several papers discussed the various aspects and principles of the organization and management of academic libraries. q i In 1954, Eugene H. Wilson, Director of Libraries, University of Colorado, emphasized in his paper, Government and Control of the College Library, that three 2®Martha Biggs, Codifying College Library Policy (Occasional Paper No. 14; Urbana: University of Illinois, Library School, 1950), p. 10. 2Q . v Robert Bingham Downs (ed.), "Current Trends m College and University Libraries," Library Trends, I (July, 1952), all. qO Donald Coney, "Management in College and University Library," Library Trends. I (July, 1952), 83-94. ^Eugene Holt Wilson, "Government and Control of the College Library," Library Quarterly. XXIV (October, 1954), 296-310. 52 topics should be of primary concern in the government and control of academic libraries: (1) the legal bases under which the college operates, (2) the governmental policy of the library, and (3) the librarian's relationship with college administration and staff. This study was initially presented as a paper before the Nineteenth Annual Conference of the Graduate Library School of the University 32 of Chicago, June 14-18, 1954. In his 1955 publication, The Relation Between the 09 Librarian and College Administration. Philip M. Benjamin, Librarian, Allegheny (Pennsylvania) College, suggested that the relationship between the librarian and the president could be ascertained in these clearly discernible ways: (l) the manner by which the library's annual budget is established, (2) the level of the president's interest in the library staff, and (3) the quality and use of the library collections. , . 34 Three years later (1958) Robert B. Downs CIO Herman Fussier (ed.), The Function of the Library in the Modern College (Chicago: University of Chicago, Graduate Library School, 1954). qq Philip Mohr Benjamin, "The Relation Between the Librarian and College Administration," College and j Research Libraries. XVI (October, 1955), 350-352; 359. ^Robert Bingham Downs (ed.), The Status of American College and University Librarians (Association of : College and Research Libraries Monograph No. 22; Chicago: American Library Association, 1958). I presented the opinions of numerous persons concerning the status of American academic librarians within the hierarchy of university government in a monograph titled, The Status of American College and University Librarians. At the time he sensed a trend toward the recognition of librarians and other professional staff members as academic personnel. 35 In 1958 Paul Wasserman, Librarian, Graduate School of Business and Public Administration, Cornell University, published a paper, Development of Administra tion in Library Service: Current Status and Future Prospects. He attempted "to assess the point to which management of libraries has progressed, to draw parallels ' with related fields, and to point out avenues which appear most promising for furthering development of man- Q / f agement theory and practice in the library field." He reviewed the pertinent literature, examined contemporary orientation to administration, similarities between library and public administration, and accomplishments in educational administration, and identified means by which library administration might be advanced. Paul Wasserman, "Development of Administration in Library Service: Current Status and Future Prospects," College and Research Libraries. XIX (July, 1958), 283-294. 36Ibid. p. 283. 54 The January 1959 issue of Library Trends, edited 37 by Ernest J. Reece, Melvil Dewey Professor Emeritus of Library Service, Columbia University, was a notable contribution to the literature of Modern library adminis tration. Several of the articles are mentioned here because of their pertinency to college and university 38 library administration. E. W. McDiarmid, Dean, College of Science, Literature, and the Arts, University of Minnesota, defined the contemporary concepts in library administration as these: (l) alternatives are open in the administrative process; (2) central administration concentrates the directive processes in the hands of a few people; (3) economy of operation can result in an improve ment and simplification of library methods and procedures; (4) lav participation in administration facilitates communication and better public relations; (5) staff participation affords a wider base of information and experience upon which to make decisions; (6 ) organization is a dynamic force that is subject to change in the meeting of altered objectives; (7) community involvement enables the public to better understand the services and goals of q r f J Ernest J. Reece (ed.), "Current Trends in Library; Administration," Library Trends, VII (January, 1959), all. 90 Errett Weir McDiarmid, "Current Concepts in Library Administration," Library Trends. VII (January, 1959), 346-356. j the library; and (8 ) research in librarianship aids the decision-making process. Writing within the context that administration can be defined as the process of getting things done through 39 people, L. Quincy Mumford and Rutherford D. Rogers, respectively the Librarian and the Chief Assistant Librarian, Library of Congress, approached the subject by presenting these seven categories: (l) planning long- range objectives within which policies may be adopted; (2) organization facilitates the reaching of goals by an orderly, systematic effort; (3) communication enables a well-conceived organization with an able staff to operate more effectively; (4) training as a corollary of good supervision pays dividends in better performance and greater understanding; (5) controlling assures the meeting of desired objectives; (6 ) public relations is performed best at the service level; and (7) supervision is the technique of getting daily work done. In his paper, Governing Authorities of Today. Karl 40 0. Burg, Librarian, Chicago Undergraduate Division, University of Illinois, affirmed: ■^Lawrence Quincy Mumford and Rutherford David Rogers, ’ ’ Library Administration in its Current Development,’ ’ Library Trends, VII (January, 1959), 357-367. 40 Karl O. Burg, ’ ’ Governing Authorities of Today,” Library Trends. VII (January, 1959), 378-387. 56 The college library seems to lend itself quite clearly to a division of labor through a balanced participation by a trustees committee, the president of the college, the faculty--through a faculty library committee--and the librarian. The distribution of functions rests in some measure upon statute, but for the most part it either follows custom or conforms to a sensible and effective division of the responsibili ties involved. 42 Edward M. Heiliger, Librarian, Champaign (Illinois) Public Library, was concerned with administra tion in all types of small libraries as he utilized the 43 outline employed by Wilson and Tauber in the presenta tion of his topic. Heiliger asserted that although the principles of administration are the same for small and large libraries, the emphases differ: . . . . The principles . . . are division of labor, authority and responsibility, discipline, unity of command, unit of management, subordination of individ ual interests to the common good, remuneration, centralization, the hierarchy, span of control, departmentation, line and staff, order, equity, sta bility of staff, initiative, and esprit de corps.^ Using a review of the literature in his paper, 45 Future of Library Administration. Eugene H. Wilson, Dean 4 .1 Ibid., pp. 378-379. 42 Edward Martin Heiliger, "Administration of Small Libraries," Library Trends. VII (January, 1959), 465-471. 43 . Wilson and Tauber, Second Edition, op. cit.. pp. 114-122. 44 Heiliger, op. cit.. p. 466. ^Eugene Holt Wilson, "Future of Library Adminis tration," Library Trends. VII (January, 1959), 472-480. of Faculties, University of Colorado, analyzed the problems which then confronted academic libraries. He concluded by suggesting several trends, which he believed would most likely affect library administration in the 46 future: (l) growth in library service units; (2) altered demands for library service, reflecting population and social changes; (3) increasing competition for funds; (4) increasing attention to basic research; and (5) changes in education for librarianship. Presuming that the literature on library adminis- 47 tration was quite well known, Walter Hausdorfer, Librarian, Temple University, presented a bibliographical essay, Guidance for Administrators, on the extensive literature on management and administration that was not generally known to library administrators. 48 In 1961 William H. Harbold examined the structure of policy making and control within the college and university libraries of the Pacific Northwest. In the determination of library policies he studied the relations 46Ibid.. p. 479. 47 Walter Hausdorfer, "Guidance for Administrators," Library Trends. VII (January, 1959), 481-491. 4®William H. Harbold, "Policy Making and Control in College and University Libraries," College. University and Special Libraries of the Pacific Northwest (ed.). Morton Kroll (Pacific Northwest Library Association Library Development Project Reports, 3; Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1961), pp. 9-58. 58 within the library and the library's relations with the administration, faculty, and students and concluded, . when serious difficulties arise within a library, or in its relations with faculty and administration, at the root of 49 the trouble is a failure of communication." In his paper, Academic Budgets and Their Administration - 1962. James H. Richards,5^ Librarian, Carleton (Minnesota) College, followed his review of the literature of budget development and budget control in academic libraries with pertinent conclusions as to the procedures and practices that he would recommend. The 1958 investigation of the status of American academic librarians by Downs'^ has already been mentioned. 52 This earlier study was updated in 1964 by Downs in an article in which he substantiated his claim that many addi tional academic institutions had accorded their librarians the privileges and responsibilities of academic status. A simplified, yet practical, study, College Library Administration, was written in 1965 by D. L. Smith and E. ^ Ibid., p. 58. ^James H. Richards, "Academic Budgets and Their Administration - 1962," Library Trends. XI (April, 1963), 415-426. Supra. p. 52. j 52 . i Robert Bingham Downs, "Status of University i Libraries - 1964," College and Research Libraries, XXV (July, 1964), 253-258. I G. Baxter, Librarian, Oxford College of Technology, and Librarian, Lanchester College of Technology, respectively. These British librarians produced a helpful text intended for colleges of technology, art, commerce, and continuing education. 54 In 1968, Raymond Kilpela, Assistant Professor of Library Science, University of Southern California, examined the structure and functions of the university library committee in universities holding membership in the Association of Research Libraries. He found that almost every large university had a library committee and that it acted largely in an advisory capacity. Appointed by either the university administration or the faculty, sometimes acting jointly, the average library committee had thirteen members. Generally, members were drawn from the teaching faculty; however, the library director was likely to be an ex officio member. Committee membership sometimes included either members of the library staff, university administrative officers, or students. In a short but perceptive study, The Administrative ^Denison Langley Smith and Eric George Baxter, College Library Administration (London: Oxford University Press, 1965). 54 Raymond Kilpela, "The University Library Committee," College and Research Libraries. XXIX (March, 1968), 141-143. 60 55 Structure of the University Library, in 1968, Kilpela asserted that a highly decentralized structure of many divisions and/or departments and departmental libraries characterized the typical large university. He wrote: . . . . The popularly accepted notion that the uni versity library usually comprises the two divisions of technical and public services, each administered by a division head who is responsible for the coordination of all such services, is more apparent than real. There are an average of seven librarians with line authority reporting to the library director. There appears to be a need to reduce this number and to place this responsibility to two or three officers on a secondary level.56 An Introduction to University Library Administra- tion, written in 1970 by James Thompson, Librarian, University of Reading (Great Britain), in an elementary study useful because of its concise survey of library administration. It is especially helpful to library school students and library administrators with a limited amount of experience. Recognizing that its major chore was to define academic or faculty status, the Academic Status Committee of the Association of College and Research Libraries 55 Raymond Kilpela, "The Administrative Structure of the University Library,” College and Research Libraries, XIX (November, 1968), 511-516. “ 56Ibid., p..511. 57 James Thompson, An Introduction to University Library Administration (Hamden, Connecticut: Archon Books,1970). 58 proposed in 1970 as standards specific rights and privileges for all academic librarians, e.g., equivalent compensation, faculty tenure, promotion based on faculty rank, sabbatical leaves, and an academic form of govern ment for the library. The case for faculty status for academic librarians was presented with but limited success in the 1970 monograph edited by Lewis C. Branscomb,^ Chairman, Committee on Academic Status, and Director of Libraries, Ohio State University. Although eleven of the fourteen papers were written by committee members, the publication with its weak, undocumented, and sometimes contradictory arguments did not make a good case in behalf of faculty status for academic librarians. Virgil F. Massman^ in 1972 reviewed the history and supportive argument for faculty status for academic librarians. After pointing out the differences and similarities between faculty members and librarians in 5®Association of College and Research Libraries. Academic Status Committee, "ACRL Academic Status Committee Proposes Standards for Librarians," College and Research Libraries News. XXXI (October, 1970), 269-272. 5^Lewis Capers Branscomb (ed.), The Case for Faculty Status for Academic Librarians (Association of College and Research Libraries Monograph No. 33; Chicago: American Library Association, 1970). ^Virgil Frank Massman, Faculty Status for Librarians (Metuchen, New Jersey: Scarecrow Press, 1972). 62 several areas, he concluded that professional prestige was commensurate with the academic preparations and contribu tions of the individuals. Community College Organization and Administration Inasmuch as the typical administrative structures in community and junior colleges parallels quite closely those found in the majority of senior colleges and universities, no need has been felt to develop an exten sive literature on the subject. Most texts on college and university administration can be used with thoughtful modification for information and guidance by perceptive community college administrators. Although numerous periodical articles and chapters or other references in books have examined various facets of the administration of community and/or junior colleges, almost no books have been devoted entirely to the topic. A possible exception, now outdated, was the mimeographed work, The Organization and Administration of the Junior College, written in 1939 by William W. Carpenter,^ Professor of Education, University ! i of Missouri. Recognizing that a vacuum existed in the I field of junior college administration, Carpenter attemptedj ^William Weston Carpenter, The Organization and Administration of the Junior College 7Columbia. Missouri! Lucas Brothers, 1939). j 63 to assist the newly appointed junior college administrator in knowing what his duties should be and how he should perform them. In explaining the problem, Carpenter quoted J. B. Johnson: .... Administrative officers in older units of our educational system find their duties fairly well defined. In fact in many positions printed instruc tions tell exactly what is or is not expected. Almost the exact opposite is true for most junior college administrative positions. A newly appointed junior college administrator is likely to find himself in a quandary when he begins to try to find the nature and bounds of his responsibili ties. First of all he may discover that his position does not correspond to any position in other junior colleges. . . . Only a few positions exist in even a majority of these colleges and they seem to be posi tions borrowed from the four year college.^2 In 1927 Wxllxam M. Proctor, Professor of Education, Stanford University, edited an early study of the junior college, The Junior College; Its Organization and Administration. Typical of the elementary nature of administrative work during the formative days of the junior college movement were Proctor’s sketchy comments concerning the library qnder the heading ’ ’ miscellaneous items": ^J. B. Johnson, as quoted by Carpenter, Ibid., p. 90. ^William Martin Proctor (ed.), The Junior College: Its Organization and Administration (Stanford, California: Standord University Press, 1927). A properly equipped library, conducted by a trained librarian, is essential. The library room should be light and airy, with plenty of stack room and appropriate space for study tables. A great assistance in the selection of reference and other books is found in the list published by the American Library Association.64 The administrative control and financial support of public junior colleges in the United States were investigated in a 1941 doctoral dissertation by Elbert B. zr c Donahue. However, the actual organization and adminis trative relationships at these institutions were not examined. 66 Wilson F. Wetzler limited his 1943 doctoral dissertation to an examination of 21 public controlled junior colleges in Texas. He found several different types of organization in these colleges: (l) control was by an administrator who acted as both dean and high school principal and was responsible to the superintendent of schools; (2) control was by a president-superintendent 64 Ibid.. p. 106. 65 Elbert Brantley Donahue, "The Control and Support of Public Junior Colleges in the United States" (unpublished Ed.D. dissertation, University of Missouri, 1941). 66Wilson Frederick Wetzler, "A Survey of the Philosophical, Administrative, and Organizational Practices and Relationships of Twenty-One Publicly Con trolled Texas Junior Colleges to Secondary Education" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Texas,1943), ^ Ibid.. pp. 90-98. 65 who was responsible to a board of education; (3) control was by a dean who theoretically was responsible to the president-superintendent but who was actually responsible to the board of trustees; (4) control was by a president who was responsible to the superintendent of schools; (5) control was by an administrator who was both president and dean and who was responsible to the board of trustees; (6) control was by a dean who was responsible to the president, who was also the superintendent of schools; (7) control was by a president who was responsible to the board of trustees; and (8 ) control was by a dean who was responsible to the president-superintendent, who was responsible to the board of trustees. In his 1952 landmark study, General Education in Action; A Report of the California Study of General / T Q Education in the Junior Colleges. B. Lamar Johnson, Professor of Higher Education, University of California (Los Angeles), emphasized the importance of administration in facilitating general education. To the observation that; the library offered a unique opportunity for vitalizing the; educational program of the college, he added these words; I i . . . . The administrator who takes advantage of the opportunity not only provides adequate facilities, 68 Byron Lamar Johnson, General Education in Action: A Report of the California Study of General Education in the Junior Colleges (Washington, D. C.; American Council j on Education, 1952). | 6 6 budget, and staff, but typically he also: 1. Makes the position of the librarian one of major importance on the instructional staff. 2. Makes the library the resource center of instruc tional materials— including not only books, magazines, and other printed materials, but also motion pictures, recordings, slides, filmstrips, and other audio-visual materials. 3. Uses the library as an avenue of instructional supervision. 4. Recognizes the role of the library in educational • ■ 69 engineering. 70 James A. Starrak and Raymond M. Hughes, who were, respectively, Professor of Vocational Education and President Emeritus of Iowa State College, devoted only a few pages of their 1954 study, The Community College in the United States, to organization and administration. Even here, the emphasis was more upon the basis of organi zation within the state than upon the organization of the individual institution. The Committee on the Public Junior College of the National Society for the Study of Education made a most thorough study of the public junior college in 1956. 71 Edited by Nelson B. Henry, the treatise examined the 69Ibid.. p. 329. 70 ! James Abel Starrak and Raymond Mollyneaux Hughes,j The Community College in the United States (Ames: Iowa j State College Press, 1954). j 71 ' Nelson Bollinger Henry (ed.), The Public Junior College (Chicago: National Society for the Study of Educa- tionj Distributed by the University of Chicago, 1956). j 67 numerous and different facets of the public junior college. In their discussion of the legal and extralegal means available for the improvement of these institutions, 72 Jesse P. Bogue and Norman Burns, Executive Secretary, American Association of Junior Colleges, and Professor of Education, University of Chicago, respectively, concluded: The concept of legal and extralegal controls is . . . inimical to a developing institution. The evolving policy of regional accrediting associations presents an illustration of the operation of this assertion. The early efforts to standardize and to suppress innovational developments have given way to an emphasis on institutional growth and improvement. Thus, the concept of control . . . has been replaced by a concept of judicious encouragement of institu tional efforts to meet more effectively the education al needs which are peculiar to their respective constituencies.^3 In his work on the American two-year college, published in 1958, Hillway7^ mentioned little concerning either the organization and administration of the college or the function of the library. His lone reference to the library appears to be an expanded version of the statement 7C by Proctor: Burns, "Legal and Junior Colleges," The Bollinger Henry, 73Ibid., p. 245. 74 Tyrus Hillway, The American Two-Year College (New York: Harper & Bros., 1958). 75Supra.p. 62. 79 '*\Jesse P. Bogue and Norman Extralegal Influences for Improving Public Junior College, (ed.) Nelson Ibid., pp. 232-246. 68 The library should not only contain a supply of books and periodicals carefully selected by a" well- trained librarian, but it should have study space and reading tables for not less than 10 per cent (prefer ably 20 per cent) of the total student body. Record ings, films, slides, maps, and other instructional materials are frequently a part of the library collec tion. As to the number and kinds of books which ought to be provided, this depends largely upon the scope and nature of the curriculum. Help in determining which books to purchase can be secured from the American Library Association and other sources. Often the size of the collection is far less important than its usefulness in relation to the courses offered.76 During the past decade there was a plethora of excellent books on the two-year college. However, most of them covered inadequately, if at all, internal community college administration or the place of the library in the administrative framework of the institution, The majority 77 of the more recent texts, such as those by Medsker, 78 70 80 Reynolds, Thornton, and Gleazer, concerned themselves with the patterns that junior college systems ^Hillway, pp. cit.. p. 224. 77 Leiand L. Medsker, The Junior College: Progress and Prospect (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1960). 78 James Walton Reynolds, The Junior College (New York: Center for Applied Research in Education, 1965). 79 James W . Thornton, Jr., The Community Junior College. Third Edition (New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1972). 80 Edmund J. Gleazer, Jr., This is the Community College (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1968). 69 generally take: (l) the fully state-controlled and state- supported plan, (2) the use of university branches for decentralizing higher education, and (3) the locally controlled community college. Of these three basic organizational patterns, the last has received the greatest attention. The trend outlined by Medsker in 1960 has continued: . . . . Legislation for establishing or expanding this type has been enacted in Florida, Oregon, North Carolina, Wyoming, and Georgia. Study commissions have strongly recommended its expansion in Michigan, Illinois, Minnesota, New York, California, and Washing ton. The marked increase in state aid for local colleges and the rapidity with which such colleges have been established in many states, including Illinois, California, Florida, and New York, is indicative of the current emphasis on this type of institution. QO Blocker, Plummer, and Richardson wrote a notable exception in that they devoted an entire chapter to the internal structure of the two-year college and its operations. In stressing the functional levels of adminis tration, they said: . . . the role of the board is confined to policy making and . . . does not include matters of adminis tration. The recommendation and implementation of policy, after its approval by the board, is the responsibility of the president, while other adminis trators . . . are responsible for the implementation and coordination of policies and procedures. The next , ^Medsker, op. cit. , p. 308. Q^ciyde E. Blocker, Robert H. Plummer, and Richard ■ . C. Richardson, Jr., The Two-Year College: A Social Synthesis (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1965), pp. 168-200. j 70 level includes those individuals who direct and coordi nate the work of the faculty and staff and supply supporting services which are required for quality teaching and learning in the c l a s s r o o m . Although the majority of educational books published during the past decade showed little concern for the internal administrative structures of American two- year colleges, this was less true of the doctoral dissertations written during this period of time. In 1963 84 Merlin E, Eisenbise, later President, Cuesta (California) 85 College, and Robert W. Pax, Dean of Students, Ventura (California) College, submitted research on the administra tive organizations and operational patterns in the California junior colleges. Pax analyzed the administra tive organizations of these institutions, described the structuring at the top levels of these administrative organizations, and developed guides for the continued im provement of administrative organization in the junior colleges. Eisenbise's purpose was to record, analyze, and compare the administrative organizations and operational 83Ibid., p. 181. ®^Merlin Edwin Eisenbise, "Administrative Organizations and Operational Patterns in Junior Colleges of California" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Connecticut, 1963). ®3Robert William Pax, "An Analysis of Junior College Administrative Organizations" (unpublished Ed.D. dissertation, University of Southern California, 1963). 71 patterns of the California junior colleges in order to make pertinent recommendations for their organizational improvements and to provide data for further study. 86 In 1966 Horace J. Burnette, Dean, Edison (Florida) Junior College, wrote a doctoral dissertation, An Analysis of the Internal Organizational Structures of Selected Public Junior Colleges in Florida. The specific purposes of his study were: (l) to determine the internal organizational and administrative structures of public junior colleges in Florida; (2) to determine the specific job descriptions of the three top echelons of junior college administration; (3) to determine the theories of administration which the organizational structures being studied follow; and (4) to classify the administrative structures into patterns or models in terms of recognized theory and administrative research. Community College Library Organization and Administration An early minor classic concerning junior college libraries, Vitalizing a College Library, was written in ®^Horace Jimmie Burnette, "An Analysis of the Internal Organizational Structures of Selected Public Junior Colleges in Florida" (unpublished Ed.D. dissertation, University of Florida, 1966). 87 1939 by B. Lamar Johnson, who at the time was both Dean of Instruction and Librarian of Stephens (Missouri) College. Although the book was based upon Johnson's experiences at Stephens College, a private junior college for women, the book proved useful to librarians at public community colleges. One of the chief features of this seven-year experimental library program was the wide distribution of library materials to departments and dormitories of the college in order to make them easily available to students at all times. It was here that the 88 essence of the Library-College idea had its birth. The book did not attempt to examine the internal organization of the library within the administrative framework of the campus. However, a pragmatic picture of the administration of the library can be gained from the 89 study of the chapter on administration and records. Such topics as the following were discussed: the faculty library committee, the student library committee, central administration of the library with a decentralized book 87Byron Lamar Johnson, Vitalizing a College Library (Chicago: American Library Association, 1939). 88 Independent study and honors reading to a large extent have been the prerogative of the superior student. The Library-College idea would make independent study the rule for all students regardless of their range of talents. 89 Johnson, op. cit.. pp. 92-113. collection, the use of library materials and the reading interests and habits of students, and the planning of the library program in terms of service instead of cost. A ground-breaking study, now outdated, was the book, The Junior College Library Program, by Harlen M. 90 Adams, Professor of Public Speaking and Dramatics, Chico State (California) College. Adams was concerned with the study of library services in relation to instructional procedures of the institution. Even his chapter on the administration of the library program was not concerned with the internal organization of the library within the administrative structure of the institution. In his 1958 dissertation, The Administrative Relationships of the Library and the Junior College, 91 Robert C. Jones, Head Librarian, American River (California) Junior College, set a three-fold goal: (l) to examine the literature of college-library administra tion and to determine the guiding principles for same, (2 ) to analyze these principles in the light of the actual practices at six selected junior colleges, and (3) to suggest ways by which college-library administrative ^Harlen Martin Adams, The Junior College Library Program (Chicago: American Library Association, 1940). 91 Robert Corwin Jones, "The Administrative Relationships of the Library and the Junior College," (unpublished Ed.D. dissertation, University of Denver, 1958). 74 procedures might be improved. This is the broad outline 92 of the guiding principles as summarized by Jones: 1. The College and the Library: A. The library should be established in the articles of incorporation, statutes, or by laws of the college. This statement should be a specific code of library policy. B. In the absence of a code of library policy in che charter or by-laws, a separate statement embodying the above principles should be devised and published. 2. The President and the Librarian: A. The president should appoint the librarian with the approval of the board of trustees. B. The president should establish the faculty and ! administrative status of the librarian. C. The president should include the librarian or his representative on committees concerning administrative and instructional policy. D. The president should establish definite channels of communication between his office and the library. E. The president should appoint a faculty-library committee to facilitate coordination of instructional needs and library services. 3. The Librarian and the President: A. The librarian should be directly responsible to the president. B. The librarian should prepare an annual report for the president. C. The librarian should have responsibility for the library budget. D. The librarian should have responsibility for library materials. E. The librarian should keep the president informed of all changes of library policy and j services, addition of materials to the library,; and staff needs. I 4. The Librarian and the Dean: | A. The librarian and the dean of instruction | should coordinate curricular changes and 92Robert Corwin Jones, "Administrative Relation ships of the Library and the Junior College," Junior College Journal. XXIX (Febtuary, 1959), 324-328. 75 requirements with library holdings and services. B. The dean of instruction and the librarian should coordinate their reports to the president to assure coordination of instruc tional needs with library services. 5. The Faculty and the Students: A. The faculty should coordinate all course changes and assignments with the librarian. B. The faculty and students should recommend books and materials for class, research, and personnel needs. C. The librarian should keep the faculty informed of all new acquisitions of books and library materials. D. The faculty and the librarian should cooper ate on either a directed reading course or individual reading and research for special . students. 6. The Faculty-Library Committee: A. There should be a faculty-library committee. B. The function, duties, and responsibilities of the committee should be specified. * 7. The Library and the Community: A. The librarian should be informed of all community functions and classes which involve use of the library. B. The librarian should maintain close contact with other libraries in the community. In her 1964 dissertation, The Community College Library; An Appraisal of Current Practice. Helen 93 Wheeler, Assistant Professor, Graduate Library School, Drexel Institute of Technology, was concerned more with what was being done in community college libraries than with the library in the administrative structure of the 93 Helen Rippier Wheeler, "The Community College Library; An Appraisal of Current Practice" (unpublished Ed.D. project, Columbia University, Teachers College, 1964). 76 institution. However, she did present some isolated data on topics of interest to the present investigation, e.g., the library committee, the library director, etc. The 94 following year Wheeler, now Associate Professor, Graduate School of Library Studies, University of Hawaii, published a book paralleling her dissertation, with a limited number of corrections and changes. 95 In 1965 an entire issue of Library Trends was devoted to a consideration of junior college libraries. Of the many articles in the issue only the one by Alice Griffith,^ Library Director, Mohawk Valley (New York) Community College, examined the organization and adminis- f tration of the library. She began by explaining why and how she had prepared the paper: . . . literature on the junior college library is very scant. Therefore, in order to investigate the organ ization and administration of junior college libraries, it is necessary to study general principles of manage ment and approved practices in other types of libra ries. It is also helpful to examine the statistical reports of junior college libraries in terms of resources, staff, and operating expenditures. . . . 94 Helen Rippier Wheeler, The Community College Library; A Plan for Action (Hamden, Connecticut: Shoe String Press, 1965). ^5Library Trends. XIV (October, 1965). Entire issue. ^Alice Groombridge Griffith, "Organization and ; Administration of the Junior College Library," Library Trends. XIV (October, 1965), 132-144. In addition . . . current junior college library practices . . . can be assessed through the use of questionnaires.97 After reviewing the principles of sound adminis tration, showing how junior college libraries are being organized and administered, and emphasizing the discernible trends in junior college library administration, Griffith concluded: . . . the administration and organization of junior college libraries are patterned quite closely after the example of the four-year college library. Although many small libraries do not have the resources, staff, or funds to develop complex adminis trative organization, their need for better organiza tion will develop as they grow in size. The junior college librarian is writing library policy. He is developing sound financial and budgetary practices. As the college grows and more departments come into existence, he is becoming responsible to the chief ad ministrator through an academic dean or dean of the faculty.98 Although Richard L. Waddle99 in his 1967 disserta tion was concerned primarily with the role of the library in the community college with specific reference to the state of Washington, he did devote an entire chapter and other isolated references to the administrative relation ship between the library and other persons or groups on the campus. He affirmed: 97Ibid., p. 132. 98Ibid., pp. 142-143. "Richard Leo Waddle, ’ ’ The Role of the Library in the Community College with Particular Reference to the State of Washington” (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Washington State University, 1967). The administration of the community college has not only the influence to shape the role the library should play, but the responsibility to make provision for fulfilling that role. The nature and extent of the role as seen by the administration will determine the provisions to be made. To have a major role, the library needs strong administrative interest and support.100 Waddle devoted almost no space to a discussion of the internal organization of the library within the administrative structure of the institution. Instead, he examined such topics as the following: the duties, responsibilities, and status of the head librarian; faculty status for the library staff; the library com mittee; means of keeping the librarian informed of admin istrative or faculty decisions, e.g., the curriculum committee; and means of keeping the administration inform- 101 ed about the library, e.g., the annual report. For more than ten years the Standards for Junior 102 College Libraries (i960), adopted by the Committee on Standards of the Association of College and Research Libraries, served as an evaluative tool for libraries of two-year colleges. These standards had a combination of qualitative and quantitative elements. In 1972 they were | superseded by the document, Guidelines for Two-Year 100Ibid.. p. 78. 101Ibid.. pp. 78-109. 102 American Library Association. Association of College and Research Libraries. Committee on Standards, "Standards for Junior College Libraries," College and Research Libraries. XXI (May, I960), 200-206. j 79 1 A O College Library Learning Resource Centers. These guidelines were a cooperative endeavor of the American Association of Junior Colleges and the Association of College and Research Libraries. "These guidelines contain no quantitative statements in the text. . . . Such numerations become too soon obsolete and inhibitory rather than remaining a desirable goal for development."^*^ The organization and administration of the library learning resource center were identified in several statements: 1. The responsibilities and functions of the center within the institutional structure and the status of the chief administrator are clearly defined. 2. The relationship of the center to the total academic program necessitates involvement of the professional staff members in all areas and levels of academic planning. 3. Advisory committees of faculty and students are essential for the evaluation and extension of services. 4. The director is responsible for the administration of the center which is carried out by means of established lines of authority, definition of responsibilities, and channels of communication defined in writing. 5. Internal administration of the center is based on staff participation in policy, procedural, and personnel decisions. 103 American Association of Junior Colleges and Association of College and Research Libraries, "AAJC-ACRL Guidelines for Two-Year College Library Learning Resource Centers," College and Research Libraries News. XXXII (October, 1971), 265-278. 104Ibid., p. 266. 105Ibid., pp. 267-269; 271. 80 6 . Budget planning for the center reflects the campus-wide instructional materials needs and is initiated by the director. Any changes are made in consultation with him. 7. The accumulation of cogent statistics and mainten ance of adequate records is a management responsi bility of the director. 8 . Adequate management includes planmed informational releases to inform administration, faculty, and students concerning activities, services, and materials. 9. Responsibilities for all learning resources and services should be assigned to the center. 10. Multicampus districts take advantage of the opportunity for close cooperation, exchange of resources, and shared technical processes while providing full resources and services for every campus. r Summary A review of the literature of senior college and university administration revealed that it was very extensive. This chapter has shown that this literature gave very little attention either to the position of the head librarian or to the library itself. Yet, these texts and other publications have proved to be extremely useful to the administrators in both senior and junior colleges. There has, therefore, been no urgent need to develop an extensive separate literature on the administration of community colleges. Much has been written on academic libraries and librarianship. In particular, a large body of valuable treatises on senior college and university library administration now exists in monographic and periodical 81 form. This material includes numerous discussions on the principles of library administration and standards for adequate library service, studies on the librarian's authority, responsibility and status, and the participa tion by administrators and faculty members in the affairs of the library. However, there is no such extensive literature particularly concerned with the administration of community college libraries. There have been only a few feeble attempts during recent years to fill this evident gap. CHAPTER V PRINCIPLES OF COLLEGE ORGANIZATION AND ADMINISTRATION WITH PARTICULAR REFERENCE. TO THE LIBRARY AND THE LIBRARIAN Inasmuch as the administrator is continually an actor within an organization, it is difficult, if not impossible, to distinguish between principles of organi zation and principles of administration. Therefore, no attempt of this nature will be made. Despite the claim of Daniel E. Griffiths'*" of Teachers College, Columbia University in 1957 that there appeared to be no establish ed principles of administration, the literature of administration is replete with attempts to state such principles. For example, Edgar L. Morphet, Roe L. Johns, and Theodore L. Reller, respectively Professor of • Education Emeritus, University of California, Berkeley; Head, Department of Educational Administration, University of Florida; and Dean, School of Education, University of California, Berkeley, summarized the so-called principles ■^Daniel Edward Griffiths, ’ ’ Toward a Theory of Administrative Behavior," Administrative Behavior in Education, (ed.) Roald F. Campbell and Russell T. Gregg (New York: Harper & Bros., 1957), p. 368. 82 83 of administration that appear to be incompatible when applied to the same situation: . . . it had been stated as a principle that adminis trative efficiency is improved by keeping the number of persons supervised (span of control) at any given level to a small number. It had also been stated as a , principle that administrative efficiency is improved by keeping to a minimum the number of levels through which a matter must pass before it is acted upon.2 This chapter will identify some basic principles of administration, apply them to the library within the structure of community college government, and offer hypotheses to be tested empirically by the data gathered in the investigation. Basic Principles of Administration Experts of educational organization would agree that few, if any, principles of administration have been developed according to the rigid standards proposed by Peter M. Blau (University of Chicago) and W. Richard Scott (Stanford University): . . . . The object of all science is to explain things. What do we mean by a scientific explanation? ! An observed fact is explained by reference to a generalj principle, that is, by showing that the occurence of j this fact under the given circumstances can be predic- j ted from the principle. To first establish such an explanatory principle as theoretical generalization, 2 Edgar Leroy Morphet, Roe L. Johns, and Theodore L. Reller, Educational Organization and Administration: Concepts, Practices, and Issues. Second Edition (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1967), p. 83. 84 many particular events must be observed and classified into general categories that make them comparable. To explain a principle requires a more general proposi tion from which this and other specific principles can be inferred.3 If principles of administration were developed in strict accordance with the standards proposed by Blau and Scott, they would be value-free, i.e., they would be equally applicable in authoritarian and democratic societies. Morphet, Johns, and Reller explain: . . . values are variables and, since democratic administrators and authoritarian administrators have different value structures, administrative processes and organizational structures will vary even though the same principles are applied. The implementation of principles of organization will vary widely . . . depending largely upon the philosophical assumptions of those in the position to make decisions.^ The American Association of University Professors Committee on College and University Government in its statement of principles said that the organization of an institution of higher education "should be designed to allow it to select and carry out its responsibilities with maximum effectiveness and integrity. The ultimate standard for judging patterns for college and university government is success in serving the purpose for which 3Peter Michael Blau and W. Richard Scott, Formal Organizations: A Comparative Approach (San Francisco: Chandler Publishing Co., 1962), p. 10. 4 Morphet, Johns, & Reller, op. cit.. p. 85. 85 5 institutions of higher education exist." Since the approximately 1,100 public community colleges are greatly diverse in size and program, the hypothesis is that no standard pattern of organization is equally sound and effective for each of them. Francis H. Horn, President, University of Rhode Island, suggested that "history and tradition, often individual personalities, rather than logic and administrative principles, may dictate its organization." Although this is true, the writer would emphasize that the primary function of an administrative organization is to facilitate efficiency and to maximize economy of operations. "It enables faculty, students, and supporting staff to achieve maximum effectiveness. It thus contributes to the realization of the purposes of an 7 institution of higher education. ..." The writer suggests that two basic principles of college organization and administration ares (l) a sound governmental policy is an essential of good administration, ^"Faculty Participation in College and University Government," AAUP Bulletin. XLVI (Summer, 1960), 203. ^Francis H. Horn, "The Organization of Colleges and Universities," Administrators in Higher Education; Their Functions and Coordination, (ed.) Gerald P. Burns (New York: Harper & Bros., 1962), p. 52. Archie Raymond Ayers and John Hamilton Russel, Internal Structure; Organization and Administration of Institutions of Higher Education (Washington, D. C.: Government Printing Office, 1962), p. 4. t 86 and this should be stated clearly in the statutes of incorporation and the by-laws of each institution; and (2) the college should be so organized that communication, consultation, and coordination prevail. In order to evaluate adequately the library in the structure of college government, these principles can be stated thus: (l) if the library is to fulfill its appropriate functions, particularly as related to the objectives of the institu tion, the lines of authority and responsibility should be clearly defined; and (2) a realistically discernible inte gration of the library with the administration’s and the institution's educational policies, objectives, and practices is needed if satisfactory library service is to be provided. These premises will be examined within the structures of the community colleges being studied. The principles of college administration, especially those that concerned the library and the librarian, were reviewed and compared with the principles of college library administration prior to an examination of the library in the administrative and organizational structure of the American public community college. These principles were helpful in the preparation of the questionnaire that was used as a basis for much of this paper. Also, these principles were relevant to the discussion of such topics as these: (l) financial support for library services; (2) the position of the head 87 librarian in the structure of college organization; (3) the qualifications of the head librarian; (4) the responsibili ties of the head librarian; (5) the head librarian’s rank and status; and (6) the participation of administration, faculty, and students in library affairs through library committees. Financial Support for Library Services The library must have adequate and consistent financial support if satisfactory library facilities, resources, and services are to be provided for its patrons. In order to accomplish these ends, the board of trustees has the responsibility of taking these specific actions: (l) initiate a policy that will provide for the support of the library as generously as possible, (2) make certain that the library is in the hands of an able and efficient administrator, and (3) provide a library collection and services that are appropriate to the institution’s goals and needs. Usually, the college president is assigned the formal and legal responsibility of preparing the institu- j i tion's budget and presenting it to the board of trustees ! i for its approval. However, the head librarian has the j i | obligation of making known to the chief administrative j j officer of the college and others the plans of the library j i and the financial requirements necessary for bringing these plans into reality. A significant portion of the total annual expenditures of the institution must be budgeted for the library if the president is to fulfill his obligation of providing adequate financial support for it. Allotting to the library a specific percentage of the institutional expenditures is one of the frequently recommended measures of support. A minimum of 5 percent of the institution's educational and general budget was suggested in 1960 for junior college libraries by the Committee on Standards of the Association of College and o Research Libraries. A year earlier the same committee recommended a similar percentage for college and research libraries.^ To determine this basic quantitative standard, many junior college libraries were consulted, junior college library statistics were analyzed, and a careful examination was made of the outstanding junior colleges of all sizes, types, and locations in the United States that were providing adequate library support for their educa tional programs. The survey showed that these institutions were spending 5 percent or more of their total educational ®American Library Association. Association of College and Research Libraries. Committee on Standards. "Standards for Junior College Libraries," College and Research Libraries. XXI (May, 1960), 200-206. 9American Library Association. Association of College and Research Libraries. Committee on Standards. "Standards for College Libraries," College and Research Libraries. XX (July, 1959), 274-280. ___ 89 and general budgets for their libraries. Since the suggested percentage was a minimal figure, the standards specifically stated that new institutions and those that provide audio-visual services should expect the percentage to be somewhat higher. Therefore, the actual percentage allotted to the library would depend upon many factors such as the age and objectives of the institution, the size of the student body, the breadth of the curriculum, and the strength of the library's holdings in basic and speciali zed areas. The words of the standards were precise: . . . . This minimum percentage is for a well established library with an adequate collection. It would have to be augmented if there is a rapid increase in the student body or in course offerings; it would again need to be increased if the library is responsi ble for an audio-visual program. The library budget for a newly organized junior college should be consi derably higher than 5 per cent. The figure might be determined by establishing rather precise acquisition goals over an initial period of several years.^ Although these 1960 standards have now been replaced with 1972 guidelines’ 1 ' ' * ' without quantitative state ments, they are still useful to institutions requiring them for self-evaluation or planning purposes. "Standards for Junior College Libraries," op. cit.. p. 201. ^American Association of Junior Colleges and Association of College and Research Libraries. "AAJC-ACRL Guidelines for Two-Year College Library Learning Resource Centers," College and Research Libraries News. XXXII (October, 1971), 265-278. “ “ 90 The percentages of educational and general expendi tures that were used for library purposes, as reported by the United States Office of Education, in American public two-year colleges are presented in Table 8 . In 1963-64, 226 institutions reported a mean of 5.4 percent and a med ian of 4.6 percent. By 1968-69, there was a slight in crease since the percentages for 368 colleges were 6 and 5.25, respectively. These statistics indicate that the number of institutions that met the 5 percent standard in creased only slightly during the five years. Whereas 99 colleges, or 44 percent, spent 5 percent or more of their total 1963-64 educational general budgets for their libra ries, 177 institutions, or 48 percent, did so in 1968r*69. Later in this paper the writer will examine the hypothesis that the institutions being studied exhibited no signifi cant difference in the proportion of the budget which they received. There are two other frequently used means of determining an institution's level of library support: (l) the expenditures per full-time equivalent student, and (2 ) the expenditures per full-time equivalent faculty member. Some authorities consider these to be more reliable measures of the extent of financial support than the percentage of educational expenditures since "it is difficult to get figures which report educational 91 Table 8 LIBRARY EXPENDITURES AS A PERCENTAGE OF EDUCATIONAL AND GENERAL EXPENDITURES— AMERICAN PUBLIC TWO-YEAR COLLEGES Percentage Number of Institutions 1963-64a 1968-69t> 17.0 and above 3C 5d 16.0 - 16.9 - 3 15.0 - 15.9 - 1 14.0 - 14.9 1 3 13.0 - 13.9 4 6 12.0 - 12.9 4 7 11.0 - 11.9 3 10 10.0 - 10.9 2 10 9.0 - 9.9 6 12 8.0 - 8.9 10 19 7.0 - 7.9 14 27 6.0 - 6.9 25 31 5.0 - 5.9 27 57 4.0 - 4.9 49 69 3.0 - 3.9 40 61 2.0 - 2.9 32 33 1.0 - 1.9 6 10 Under 1.0 — 4e Total 226 368 Mean 5.4 6.0 Median 4.6 5.25 aU. S. Office of Colleges and Universities Education. Library Statistics of , 1963-64; Institutional Data (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1965), pp. 132-156. ^U. S. Office of Education, Library Statistics of Colleges and Universities: Data for Individual Institu tions . Fall. 1968 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1969), pp. 37-68. cRange was 17.1 - 20.9. ^Range was 17.7 - 24.8 eTalley was: 0.1 - 2 responses, 0.2-1 response, and 0.7 - 1 response. expenditures only." However, one must keep in mind j : ! that the increasing costs of library materials and the j i rising operating costs refute the popular conclusion j that higher education is spending more money per student 13 or faculty member. Table 9 compares the library operating expenditures I per full-time equivalent student for 254 American public j community colleges in 1963-64 with similar expenditures for 396 community colleges in 1968-69. The mean annual I i expenditures per student were $35.98 and $61.81, respec- j ; j tively. However, in both comparisons the median expendi- j ■tures were somewhat smaller, i.e., $27.00 and $50.00, j t i respectively. The improvement during this five-year periodj was quite real since inflation was responsible for only j j i one-third of the increase. These statistics show that j ! whereas only 47 colleges, or 18.5 percent, spent $50.00 or ; more per student for their library operations in 1963-64, j i I 204 institutions, or 51.5 percent, were doing so in 1968- ! j 69. The assumption is made that the institutions being ! 1 ? Stephen Anthony McCarthy, "Financial Support of College and University Libraries," Library Trends. I (July, 1952), 112. •*-^John David Millett, Financing Higher Education in the United States (New York: Columbia University Press, 1952), p. 122. 93 Table 9 LIBRARY EXPENDITURES PER FULL-TIME EQUIVALENT STUDENT--AMERICAN PUBLIC TWO-YEAR COLLEGES Number of Institutions Amount 1963-643- 1968-69b $130 and above 4c igd 120 - $129 3 9 110 - 119 - 7 100 - 109 1 13 90 - 99 2 17 80 - 89 7 24 70 - 79 7 25 60 - 69 11 47 50 - 59 12 43 40 - 49 23 63 30 - 39 41 71 20 - 29 75 45 10 - 19 63 13 Under 10 5 - Total 254 396 Mean $35.98 $61.81 Median $27.00 $50.00 aU. S. Office of Education, Library Statistics of Colleges and Universities, 1963-64: Institutional Data (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1965), pp. 132-156. ^U. S. Office of Education, Library Statistics of Colleges and Universities: Data for Individual Institu tions. Fall. 1968 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1969), pp. 37-68. cRange was $132 - $200. dRange was $134 - $353. 94 studied in this investigation will exhibit similar characteristics. The library operating expenditures per full-time equivalent faculty member for 250 junior colleges in 1963-64 are compared with similar expenditures in 1968-69 for 369 institutions in Table 10. The mean annual expenditures per faculty member were $763*64 and $970.73, respectively. Again, in both comparisons the median expenditures were somewhat smaller, i.e., $651.50 and $856.00, respectively. During the five-year period, the percentage of increase per faculty member was considerably less than it was for the expenditures per student. In fact, the increase was only slightly more than the rate of inflation. Also, only 79 institutions, or 21.4 percent, spent $1,000 or more per faculty member for library operations in 1968-69. There appears to be no reason to believe that the colleges to be examined in greater detail i will exhibit characteristics different from these published' statistics. j The place of the library in the structure of the j community college is easily assessed by the observation of the head librarian's involvement and responsibility in the preparation and presentation of the library budget. "It is of paramount importance that the librarian be invited by the president or chief budgetary officer to Table 10 LIBRARY EXPENDITURES PER FULL-TIME EQUIVALENT FACULTY MEMBER— AMERICAN PUBLIC TWO-YEAR COLLEGES Amount Number of Institutions 1963-64a 1968-69D $3,000 and above lc 5d $2,900 - $2,999 - - 2,800 - 2,899 - - 2,700 - 2,799 - - 2,600 - 2,699 1 - 2,500 - 2,599 - - 2,400 - 2,499 1 3 2,300 - 2,399 1 1 2,200 - 2,299 - 2 2,100 - 2,199 3 1 2,000 - 2,099 — 4 1,900 - 1,999 - 5 1,800 - 1,899 3 4 1,700 - 1,799 2 5 1,600 - 1,699 - 10 1,500 - 1,599 4 9 1,400 - 1,499 2 9 1,300 - 1,399 5 14 1,200 - 1,299 7 8 1,100 - 1,199 5 28 1,000 - 1,099 14 21 900 - 999 13 38 800 - 899 22 35 700 - 799 22 47 600 - 699 35 40 500 — 599 47 20 800 - byy 35 700 - 799 22 47 600 - 699 35 40 500 - 599 47 20 400 - 499 40 29 300 - 399 15 24 200 - 299 5 4 ow $200 2 3 Total 250 369 Mean $763.64 $970.73 Median $651.50 $856.00 aU. S; Office of Education, Library Statistics of Colleges and Universities, 1963-64; Institutional Data (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1965), pp. 132-156. ^U. S. Office of Education, Library Statistics of Colleges and Universities; Data for Individual Institutions, Fall. 1968 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1969), pp. 37-68. --------- cActual amount was $3,641. ^Range was $3,027 - $5,352 Total 250 369 Mean $763.64 $970.73 Median $651.50 $856.00 aU. S. Office of Education, Library Statistics of Colleges and Universities, 1963-64; Institutional Data (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1965), pp. 132-156. ^U. S. Office of Education, Library Statistics of Colleges and Universities; Data for Individual Institutions. Fall, 1968 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1969), pp. 37-68. — ------- °Actual amount was $3,641. ^Range was $3,027 - $5,352 96 14 submit the library budget." Position of the Head Librarian in the Structure of College Organization The statutes of incorporation and the by-laws of the community college should define explicitly all educational and administrative officers of the institution, including the head librarian. Although the board of trustees has the legal responsibility for the operation and policies of the college, the head librarian should be responsible to the president either directly or through his delegated representative, e.g., the academic dean or the vice-president. That the head librarian should report to the chief administrative officer through the academic vice- president or dean was suggested or implied by such writers j in the field of administration in higher education as Brumbaugh,15 Horn,16 Hungate,17 Russell,18 and | ■^James H. Richards, "Academic Budgets and Their Administration - 1962," Library Trends. XI (April, 1963), ! 415. | - * - 6Aaron John Brumbaugh, Problems in College Administration (Nashville, Tennessee: The Methodist Church Board of Education, 1956), p. 3. 16Horn, op. cit.. p. 61. 17 Thad Lewis Hungate, Management in Higher Educa tion (New York: Columbia University, Teachers College, Bureau of Publications, 1964), p. 89. •^John Dale Russell, "Changing Patterns of j 19 20 Woodburne. However, Blackwell seemed to believe that the library director should have direct organizational responsibility to the college president for the government and administration of the library since he quoted without comment but with seeming approval words to this effect by PI Wilson and Tauber. Although these authors concerned themselves in this historic work with the university library and its organization, administration, and finances, Blackwell suggested that the volume was pertinent for college and university library management. In 1962 the United States Office of Education investigated the differ ing organizational structures in the various types of institutions of higher education, including two-year colleges. About three-fourths of the 129 organizational charts examined in the study showed the position of head librarian. John H. Russel, Acting Chief, Faculty and Student Services Section, Division of Higher Education, Administrative Organization in Higher Education," Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences. CCCIj (September, 1955), 27. 19 ' Lloyd Stuart Woodburne, Principles of College and! University Administration (Stanford, California: Stanford University Press, 1958), p. 22. j 20 | Thomas Edward Blackwell, College and University j Administration (New York: The Center for Applied Research j iin Education, 1966), p. 47. j i P T ^ Louis Round Wilson and Maurice Falcolm Tauber, : The University Library: Its Organization, Administration, j 98 22 United States Office of Education, and Archie R. Ayers, Specialist for College and University Organization, Division of Higher Education, United States Office of Education, reported that approximately one-third had the head librarian reporting directly to the college president. On a considerable number of the other charts the librarian was assigned to the academic area of the institution with organizational responsibility to the dean in the majority of cases. An example of an administrative structure often suggested by writers in the field of college and university administration is given in Chart 1. Although many authorities in the administration of higher education would recommend more direct access to the president of the institution, they were aware that in some situations this would be neither possible nor practical. This pragmatic recognition of reality resulted from the breadth of responsibility for the college president and the continua tion of a long-time trend toward the delegation of author ity and executive functions to a vice-president, academic dean, or other similar administrative officer of the and Finances (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1945), p. 107. ; ! op i John Hamilton Russel and Archie Raymond Ayers, ! "Patterns of Administration," Junior College Journal. XXXIII (May, 1963), 7. ORGANIZATION CHART CHART 1 j Board of Regents**! Board of Deans Academic Vice-President j Registrar* News Service 1 Library | Adult Education I | Student Assn. Health Services | Comptroller Dining Halls University Senate Executive Committee of Senate I Special Committees I Contract Accounting I Payroll 11 Accounting"! | Cashier ! beans of Colleges j University Faculty 1 | Nursing | | Pharmacy] | Forestry | 1 Engineering | Education | j Arts and Sciences""] Medicine Dentistry Budget Officer Housing Finance Legal Counsel Dean of Students Graduate School Services— Business Veterans Operations Chief Accountant Buildings and Grounds Counseling and Testing Nonacademic Personnel Financial Vice-President Business Administration Health Sciences Business Manager Administrative Boards and Committees ^loyd S. Woodburne, Principles of College and University Administration (Stanford, California Stanford University Press, 1958), p. 22. institution. 23 Blocker, Plummer, and Richardson have discussed the formal organization of two-year colleges. In describing a conventional line-staff organization of a two- year college, the authors observed that each of the individuals on the five levels would have his responsibili ties outlined in the faculty handbook and the policy manual of the board. A modification of the typical line-staff organization would improve the administration of the college. Such changes would include more direct emphasis upon the educational and personnel functions of the college; and the assignment of personnel and administrative responsibilities for supporting services in a meaningful relationship with other segments of the institution. The writer believes that this investigation will j support the judgment that the head librarian should report | to the same officer as do others who are concerned with the! curricular and teaching functions of the college. He should be so placed in the organizational and administra tive structure of the institution that he becomes j immediately aware of all plans, problems, and developments, whether they be governmental, academic, or financial. pq “ ^Clyde E. Blocker, Robert H. Plummer, and Richard C. Richardson, Jr., The Two-Year College: A Social Synthesis (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, line., 1965), pp. 175-179. 1 0 1 Likewise, he should be a member of the administrative council, if any, the academic senate, faculty councils and any committees that might discuss policies or make decisions that bear on library resources or services, e.g., the curriculum committee. The writer suggests that this investigation will substantiate the claim that "Membership of the librarian on the curriculum committee or academic policy committee is advisable to develop unity of purpose 24 between classroom and library." Qualifications of the Head Librarian The literature of college and university adminis tration made but little mention of the qualifications of the head librarian. Frank L. McVey, former President of both the University of North Dakota and the University of 25 Kentucky, and Raymond M. Hughes, the former President of both Miami University and Iowa State College, recognized that he should be a person of first class caliber, who has advanced to his position because of professional training, administrative ability, and scholarship. Blackwell^ ^"Standards for Junior College Libraries," op. cit., p. 200. Qtr Frank LeRond McVey and Raymond Mollyneaux Hughes, j Problems of College and University Administration (Ames, J Iowa: State College Press, 1952), p. 295. j | 26Biackwell, op. cit., p. 51. j 1 0 2 mentioned that the head librarian is usually expected to have a graduate degree, be a good administrator, and have scholarly interests. Then he quoted approvingly the words of John Dale Russell, Professor of Education, University of Chicago: In order to maintain effectively his position in this community of scholars . . * the librarian must himself qualify as a scholar. He must be broadly acquainted with the manifold fields of human knowledge. He must be able to speak the language of scholars. He must know the ways in which scholars and specialists in various fields derive their knowledge and apply it to practical situations. These qualifications are essential in the eyes of specialists in college and university library administra tion. Louis R. Wilson asserted that the modern college "insists that the librarian must be a person of imagination and initiative, that he must have a sound understanding of library administration and some subject field, and that he must know how to relate the use of the library to the 28 educational program of the college." These specific 29 qualities for the head librarian were suggested by Lyle: P7 John Dale Russell, "Professional Education for Librarianship," Libfarv Quarterly. XII (October, 1942), ■780. 28Louis Round Wilson, "The Role of the Library in Higher Education." In: Vanderbilt University. The Inauguration of Oliver C. Carmichael as Chancellor . . . (Nashville, Tennessee: Vanderbilt University, 1938), pp. 58-59. i 2^Guy Redvers Lyle, The Administration of the College Library. Third Edition (New York: H. W. Wilson |Co., 1961), pp. 183-187. 103 (l) administrative ability, (2) scholarly interest, (3) understanding of the college program, and (4) the ability to work with students. In discussing the qualifications of the director of the library, Kenneth J. Brough, College Librarian, San Francisco State College, said: . . . . He must have a wide knowledge of books, and he must also understand their worth and effective use in the program of instruction and research. He must have a grasp of established principles of library management and at the same time be able to stimulate and direct innovations and meet new demands. He must combine the predilections of the scholar with the competencies of the administrator and the businessman. He must be a promoter skillful in furthering his plans for the advancement of library service without rousing antagon ism among the members of the faculty.^0 Comparable skills and interests are required of successful community college head librarians. Responsibilities of the Head Librarian Little specific information on the responsibilities of the head librarian appears in the literature of college j and university administration. However, most authorities i 31 on academic library administration would agree with Hughes i qn ^Kenneth J. Brough, Scholar's Workshop: Evaluating Conceptions of Library Service (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1953), pp. 164-165. 3lRaymond Mollyneaux Hughes, A Manual for Trustees. Third Edition (Ames, Iowa: Collegiate Press, 1961), p. 108. 104 when he stated that the librarian should be given complete responsibility for the administration of the library. This includes the preparation of the library budget and the execution of his professional duties without interference. There is the recognition, of course, that he will seek the advice and assistance of the faculty in collection building and guidance of the administrative officers in financial matters. Through annual reports and other communications he will keep the board of trustees, the administration, and the faculty informed of library plans, program, and progress. The responsibilities of a university librarian were well summarized by Wilson and Tauber. Most of these responsibilities are judged by the writer to also be pert inent to the director of the community college library: 1. To formulate and administer policies, rules, and regulations for the purpose of securing the most complete use of the library by students, faculty members, and other members of the university community 2. To participate in the formulation of the education al policies of the university 3. To participate in the activities of the university library committee as a member and as an officer (usually secretary, rather than chairman) 4. To maintain relationships with the president, deans, and other university officials 5. To bear responsibility to the president for the satisfactory government and administration of the library 6 . To select a harmonious administrative, technical, and service staff and to recommend their employment to the president 105 7. To make recommendations to the president on all matters pertaining to the status, promotion, change in position, or dismissal of members of the library staff 8 . To guide the development of the book collection of the university libraries and to be responsible for all book collections of the university 9. To represent the university library to its users, general public, and in educational and library groups 10. To make reports to the president or board of trustees and to library agencies 11. To-assist in securing gifts for the library 12. To prepare and execute the annual budget for the operation of the library 13. To cooperate with librarians and scholars in making the resources available for research.32 The Head Librarian's Rank and Status The librarian's rank and status were mentioned but little in the literature of college and university adminis tration. In a rare exception, Horn observed, "The librarian in larger institutions usually enjoys a status comparable to that of a dean, in a few cases he now carries the title 'dean of libraries,' in others, 'Director of 33 Libraries.'" Now a few of the larger public community colleges even give their library directors administrative status with the title of dean or assistant dean. Some i ;believe that the head librarian must have a status above QO , , # i Louis Round Wilson and Maurice Falcolm Tauber, j The University Library. Second Edition (New York: Columbia! University Press, 1956. i 3 3 . ! Horn, op. cit., p. 61. 106 ! i I that of the faculty in order to gain recognition. Others | | believe that this is not necessary and that a head libra- j rian can give effective leadership regardless of the title.j i !Authorities in the field of college and university library administration generally agree that members of the profes- i I sional library staff, including the head librarian, should | !have academic status, i.e., recognition of the librarians j ' i as members of the instructional and research staffs. This ! s I i i ! recognition will usually take the form of faculty rank and I i iother related privileges and obligations. The American | O.A ; Library Association's Standards for College Libraries and I ] q c I Standards for Junior College Libraries stated unequivo- : cally that the librarian should have faculty status with the identical benefits enjoyed by members of the teaching :staff. A similar statement was made in the 1972 guidelines published by the American Association of Junior Colleges and the Association of College and Research Libraries: | I Every professional staff member has faculty status, together with all faculty benefits and obligations. Faculty status for professional staff includes such prerogatives as tenure rights, sick leave benefits, sabbatical leaves, vacation benefits, comparable hours of duty, retirement and annunity benefits, and inclu- j sion on the same salary scale which is in effect ^•©tandards for College Libraries," op. cit.. p. ! 276. 35 "Standards for Junxor College Libraries," l op. cit.. p. 202. 107 for faculty members engaged in classroom teaching. Lyle stated: .... It should be further pointed out that all regional accrediting associations but one specify faculty status for the head librarian, that the Western College Association extends faculty status to the head librarian and department heads, and that the Southern Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools states that all members of the professional staff shall have 'faculty rank, comparable salaries and p r i v i l e g e s .137 Although some eminent librarians®® are of the opinion that faculty status will be achieved for all college and university libraries eventually, thinking that such status will assist in the creation of better library service for all, not all librarians share this belief. Recognizing that he was probably engaged in a losing battle, Robert Vosper, Director of Libraries, University of Kansas, still argued: [ Librarians] . . . should and can maintain a position of dignity and importance on the campus simply as : librarians and without necessarily tying themselves on a faculty pattern . . . they should and could secure as: many specific privileges as they want but these .. . can be secured in most cases without adopting formaliz ed faculty titles.39 ®^"AAJC-ACRL Guidelines for Two-Year College Library Learning Resource Centers," op. cit.. p. 271. 37 Lyle, Third Edition, op. cit.. p. 194. 3 8 I b i d . Robert Vosper, as quoted by Robert Bingham Downs, "Current Status of University Library Staff," College and Research Libraries, XVIII (September, 1957), 381. 108 Paul Buck, Director of University Libraries, Harvard University, supported this school of thought: .... Special preparation fits the librarian for his profession; careers in librarianship have their own distinctive patterns; and the librarian's contribution to the university is the one that only he can make. When these facts are recognized . . . it seems desir able for the Library staff to stand on its own feet as a distinct professional group with a personnel program ; specifically designed for it. 4° The hypothesis is made that the librarians of a significant majority of community colleges have faculty status and the accompanying benefits. Committee on the Library The general literature of college and university ; administration frequently mentioned the faculty library committee as an instrument that helps in the formulation of library policy. For example, Blackwell wrote: Most colleges and universities have found the com- ; mittee to be the most desirable method of assisting the; president and the library in formulating basic policies! for its administration, and of keeping the librarian informed about the service desired by members of the faculty and the student body. The committee, mostly j members of the faculty, is usually appointed by the president.41 Historically, the committee has performed numerous i i I I 40paul Buck, "A New Personnel Program for Harvard Librarians," Harvard Library Bulletin. XXI (Autum^, 1958), 292. | 41Blackwell, op. cit.. p. 48. 109 roles in the history of colleges, and its function has varied from campus to campus. However, Louis Round Wilson,; Keyes D. Metcalf, and Donald Coney, of the University of North Carolina, Harvard University, and the University of California (Berkeley), respectively, observed, "These variations can . . . be classified in two opposing cate gories: the committee as a channel of communication between faculty and library or an advisory function; as an agency of faculty control of the library, a legislative - judical and/or executive function.Support for the former position is given by the majority of librarians who believe that a competent, knowledgeable library administra tor will use his advisory committee effectively and intelligently. Lyle cautioned: . . . . Nothing will undermine more quickly the effec- j tiveness of the role of the library in the college than| a committee which acts or tries to act in an adminis trative capacity. The library committee's function must always be understood as advisory and never as ad ministrative; but it is important to use the committee in policy determination as well as in the discussion of ; administrative matters even if it does not have the authority or power to enforce its recommendations.43 Although the faculty voice through the library j i i committee may be softened by not having executive or | AO Louis Round Wilson, Keyes D. Metcalf and Donald Coney, A Report of Certain Problems of the Libraries and ; School of Library Service of Columbia University (New York: i Columbia University Libraries, 1947), p. 1. j 4^Lyle, Third Edition, op. cit.. p. 41. j 1 1 0 administrative authority, it still must be heard by the library administration. There is no universal agreement on the primary duties of a faculty library committee; however, the writer would suggest that this investigation of public community college libraries will find that the committee's duties should include these: (l) to investigate and determine the needs and interests of the library, (2) to establish policies for the development of the library's resources in line with the ability and purposes of the institution, and (3) to serve in a liaison capacity in the interpretation of library policies to faculty, students, and others. If the committee is given a statement of its function and responsibilities and these are a part of the faculty handbook and/or are incorporated into the by-laws of the institution, it can operate more intelligently and effectively. Usually, members of the committee are selected by one of several methods or a combination of these methods: (1) appointment by the chief administrator of the college, (2) appointment by the academic dean or other administra tive officer, (3) appointment by a committee, (4) appoint ment by the library director, or (5) appointment by departmental chairmen. At the vast majority of senior colleges and universities either the president or the dean makes the appointments. However, this investigator believes that there is greater faculty or departmental involvement in the appointments of committee members at community colleges. Generally, the committee will be composed of faculty members from various academic depart ments, the chief administrative officer and/or his representative, the head librarian, and/or other librar ians , and one or more students. The Standards for Junior College Libraries recommend: [ The committee] . . . should include representatives of the various academic divisions of the college and con sist of both senior and junior members of the faculty, chosen carefully for their demonstrated interest in the library . . . the committee functions in an advisory capacity . . . and acts as a connecting link between the faculty . . . and the library.44 Although faculty members will naturally represent particular points of view and the concerns of their specific disciplines, they are expected to assist in the development of library policies and programs as official representatives of the library. Since a considerable number of the faculty library committee at senior colleges and universities have student representation, relatively few colleges have or feel a need for separate student library committees. At only a few institutions does the board of trustees have either a separate library committee or members on the regular library committee. The number of Friends of the Library 44|'Standards for Junior College Libraries," op. cit.. p. 201. 1 1 2 organizations on college campuses is quite small. It is anticipated that this study will find that community colleges have similar characteristics. Summary This chapter has delineated and discussed the guiding principles that will facilitate the assessment of the position of the library and the head librarian in the American public community colleges under consideration. The need for an efficient organization that provides communication, coordination, and support of the adminis trative functions of the institution is stressed in these principles. In addition, they are concerned with the span of the head librarian's authority, his qualifications and responsibilities, his participation in academic matters, and the participation by the faculty in library service, needs, and development. Throughout the chapter, hypotheses are offered that will be tested in the dissertation by the data gathered. I CHAPTER VI THE LIBRARY IN THE GOVERNMENT OF AMERICAN PUBLIC COMMUNITY COLLEGES This chapter examines the library in relation to the governmental structure of the American public community: college. Such topics are discussed as the administrative control of the community college, the administrative and organizational structure of the library, the role of the library, the financial support of the library, the span of control of the head librarian, the participation of the administration in library matters, the participation of the faculty in library matters, and communication with the faculty and the administration by the head librarian. Administrative Control of the Community Colleges The administrative and organizational structure of j j most public community colleges parallels to a significant j extent that found in the majority of senior colleges and i universities. Community college teachers who transfer to senior institutions and teachers in four-year colleges (excluding research personnel) who move to two-year i : ! 113 114; i institutions normally have little or no difficulty in adjusting themselves into the administrative patterns of their new environments. This statement will also be true for most academic librarians. Generally, librarians in i two- and four-year academic institutions will have received their professional education and training in graduate library schools associated with senior colleges or universities and accredited by the American Library Asso ciation. Also, they will have accepted the standards developed by the Association of College and Research Libraries, a division of the American Library Association. Patterns of Organization. Three basic patterns for! the organization of the American public two-year college ; have been identified by Medsker:'1 ' (1) the fully state- i controlled and state-supported plan, (2) the use of branches of senior colleges or universities for the decen tralization of higher education, and (3) the'locally controlled community college. Of these’ three basic organi-i zational patterns, the last has received the greatest j amount of attention and appears to be the most popular. However, this pattern has taken divergent forms in various areas of the nation and at different times during the past half-century. Although it would appear that most community ■ ' ’ Leiand L. Medsker, The Junior College: Progress and Prospect (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1960), pp. 307-308. 115 colleges presently are operated by college districts that are independent of local or state school systems, there are still a few colleges which are identified with high school districts or unified districts, i.e., kindergarten through the twelfth grade. Reynolds described such colleges: . . . . These junior colleges are the natural out growth of the upward extension of secondary schools. The school district which maintains the secondary school, whether it be a high school district or one that provides both elementary and high schools, merely adds another unit to its program, the junior college. Control over the junior college is exercised by the school district board, and the administrative head of the junior college reports to the superintendent of schools in the district.^ According to Table 11, the author's survey indicated that 180 of 252 reporting institutions, or 72 percent, were identified with independent community college districts. Only 5 colleges, or 2 percent, appeared to be sponsored by unified districts, and a single institution, or .5 percent, was a part of a secondary school district. There were 56 colleges, or 21.5 percent, which were administered by a political subdivision, i.e., state, county, or city. Administrative and Organizational Structure. Only 53 respondents, or 36 percent, stated that their colleges had been established under general state statutes. The ^James Walton Reynolds, The Junior College (New York: Center for Applied Research in Education, 1965). p. 78. 116 Table 11 ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROL OF COMMUNITY COLLEGES AS INDICATED BY ANSWERS ON QUESTIONNAIRES Type of Control Number of Institutions Percentage High School District 1 .5 Unified District 5 2.0 Independent Community College District 180 72.0 Senior College or University 10 4.0 At the State Level 36 14.0 At the County Level 14 5.5 At the City Level 3 1.0 An Area Board 3 1.0 Total 252 100.0 117 actual number may be higher. All states now have enabling acts which allow for the establishment of community colleges without necessitating special legislation for each individual institution. Probably many of the respondents who indicated that their community colleges were not established under general statutes of incorporation either ignored these broader-based enabling acts or were unaware of them. In most states, the legislatures have added the broader enabling acts upon the old statutes. The latter were not repealed. Therefore, a junior college which had been established under an earlier act continues to operate under that statute rather than the newer one. For example, the Board of Education in Flint, Michigan maintains the junior college. Although the board has given consideration to reorganizing it under the broader enabling act, it has not done so. If such a-’ reorganization ■ werB'esf^f ected , 4 s i, the Board of Education would no longer maintain control over the junior college. Its control would pass to a newly created board under the broader enabling act. This identical situation exists in many states. As Table 12 shows, 246 separate state legislative acts that established an expanded community college law were passed between the years of 1907 and 1968. Appendix A^ q •^Reproduced from Establishing Legal Bases for I Community Colleges (Washington, D. C.: American Association of Junior Colleges, 1961), pp. 33-43. 118 exhibits the state law in Missouri in 1961 that provided for the formation of junior college districts. Portions of the California Administrative Code^ and the Education Code5 for California are reproduced in Appendix B. In none of these was the library or the library staff mentioned. Despite the fact that only 5 institutions stated that their statutes of incorporation mentioned the library ; and/or the head librarian, the total may be higher for the reasons given above, i.e., the statutes or enabling acts permitted the establishment of community colleges within the state without the need of a separate act for each college. 1963 enabling act for Pennsylvania referred to the library in these words: Section 14. Financial Program: Reimbursement or Payments i (3). . . . Operating cost shall mean all other expenses not defined as capital expenses which are incurred during a fiscal year in the establishment, operation and maintenance of a community college for; amortization of the purchase of lands; purchase, construction or improvement of buildings for admin istrative and instructional purposes, including libraries; the lease of lands or buildings, or for rentals to an authority for the same purpose; and for the purchase of capital equipment and furniture | used for instructional or administrative purposes. | Capital expenses shall include library books and j California Administrative Code. 1969. Title 5. Registrar 69, No. 39, Part VI. Chap. Sects. 50000-50047. California, Education Code. 1969. Division 18.5. Chap. 1. Sects. 25410-25424. Table 12 STATE LEGISLATIVE ENABLING ACTS WHICH ESTABLISHED AND EXPANDED PUBLIC TWO-YEAR COLLEGES3,»b»c State Date of Enactment Alabama Alaska Arkansas Arizona 1261, 1953, 1962 1927, 1202, 1962’ 1931, 1963 1947, 1949, 1953, 1960, 1961, 1962 California 1907, 1917, 1921, 1927, 1931, 1935, 1937, 1943 1945, 1949, 1953, 1955, 1957, 1958, 1959, 1960 1961, 1962, 1967, 1968 Colorado 1937, 1957, 1959, 1960, 1961, 1962, 1967 Connecticut 1937, 1959, 1962, 1965, 1967 Delaware 1967 Florida 1939, 1962, 1947, 1965, 1949, 1967, 1953, 1968 1955, 1957, 1959, 1961 Georgia 1958, 1962, 1964 Hawaii 1964 Idaho 1939, 1953, 1955, 1957, 1961, 1962 Illinois 1937, 1965, 1945, 1967 1951, 1953, 1955, 1957, 1959, 1961 Indiana 1962 Iowa 1927, 1931, 1935, 1941, 1943, 1949, 1957, 1965 Kansas 1917, 1965 1923, 1931, 1937, 1941, 1947, 1957, 1961 Kentucky 1936, 1946, 1960, 1962 Louisiana 1928, 1966 Maine 1961 Maryland 1960, 1961, 1962, 1965, 1968 Massachusetts 1947, 1948, 1957, 1958, 1960, 1962, 1965 Michigan 1917, 1929, 1931, 1936, 1947, 1951, 1955, 1957 1960, 1961, 1963, 1964, 1965 M l n n o e r i + a i no c i no* 7 i n o n i n tr o * i n r- 1965 Kentucky 1936, 1946, 1960, 1962 Louisiana 1928, 1966 Maine 1961 Maryland 1960, 1961, 1962, 1965, 1968 Massachusetts 1947, 1948, 1957, 1958, 1960, 1962 Michigan 1917, 1929, 1931, 1936, 1947, 1951 1960, 1961, 1963, 1964, 1965 Minnesota 1925, 1927, 1939, 1957, 1963, 1965 Mississippi 1928, 1929, 1930, 1932, 1934, 1936 1960, 1962, 1964, Missouri 1927, 1961, 1965, 1966, 1967 Montana 1939, 1947, 1953, 1965 Nebraska 1931, 1941, 1943, 1947, 1955, 1957 Nevada 1967 New Hampshire 1961, 1962 New Jersey 1946, 1962, 1963, 1968 New Mexico 1957, 1962 New York 1948, 1949, 1953, 1955, 1957, 1960 North Carolina 1957, 1961, 1962, 1963, 1965 North Dakota 1931, 1941, 1949, 1957, 1959, 1962 Ohio 1961, 1962, 1963, 1964, 1965, 1968 Oklahoma 1939, 1941, 1962, 1968 Oregon 1949, 1951, 1957, 1959, 1961, 1962 Penns y1vani a 1963, 1965, 1967, 1968 Rhode Island 1960 South Carolina 1935 South Dakota 1967 Tennessee 1967 Texas 1929, 1935, 1936, 1937, 1941, 1945 1957, 1958, 1959, 1961, 1962, 1965 Utah 1962 V erm o n t 1962 Virginia 1962, 1966 Washington 1941, 1943, 1945, 1961, 1965, 1967 West Virginia 1961, 1962 Wisconsin 1945, 1951 Wyoming 1953, 1955, 1957, 1959 ^lyde E. Blocker, Robert H. Plummer, and Richard C. Richardson, Jr., The jwo-Year College;— A Social Synthesis (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1965), pp. 28-30. Establishing Legal Bases for Community Colleges (Washington, C. C.: iNew mexico / , New York 1948, 1949, 1953, 1955, 1957, 1960 North Carolina 1957, 1961, 1962, 1963, 1965 North Dakota 1931, 1941, 1949, 1957, 1959, 1962 Ohio 1961, 1962, 1963, 1964, 1965, 1968 Oklahoma 1939, 1941, 1962, 1968 Oregon 1949, 1951, 1957, 1959, 1961, 1962 Pennsylvania 1963, 1965, 1967, 1968 Rhode Island 1960 South Carolina 1935 South Dakota 1967 Tennessee 1967 Texas 1929, 1935, 1936, 1937, 1941, 1945 1957, 1958, 1959, 1961, 1962, 1965 Utah 1962 Vermont 1962 Virginia 1962, 1966 Washington 1941, 1943, 1945, 1961, 1965, 1967 West Virginia 1961, 1962 Wisconsin 1945, 1951 Wyoming 1953, 1955, 1957, 1959 1962, 1964 1965 ^lyde E. Blocker, Robert H. Plummer, and Richard C. Richardson, Jr., The Two-Year College: A Social Synthesis (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1965), pp. 28-30. ^Establishing Legal Bases for Community Colleges (Washington, C. C.: American Association of Junior Colleges, 1961), p. 32. cRoger Yarrington, Junior Colleges: 50 States/50 Years (Washington, D. C.: American Association of Junior Colleges. 1 9 6 9 ) . ____________________ complementary audio-visual equipment purchased during the first five years after establishment.6 By-laws, according to Hungate, should "define internal organization and working relationships" of an institution of higher education. Only 54, or slightly more than one-third of the 149 reporting colleges, said that they had by-laws. Of these, only 12 actually mentioned either the library or the library staff. There is the mere listing of the library committee in the by-laws of the board of trustees of the Muskegon (Michigan) County Community College: Article VII The Chairman of the Board shall appoint the following standing committees from the membership of the Board; appointments to be made with the advice and approval of the Board: A. Finance B. Personnel C. Curriculum D. Buildings and Grounds E. Library® The library and the library staff are mentioned in considerable detail in the by-laws of the Board of Higher ^Pennsylvania. 1965. General Assembly Act No. 322, (amendment of Public Law 1132, dated 1961). 7 'Thad Lewis Hungate, Management m Higher Education (New York: Columbia University, Teachers College, Bureau of Publications, 1964), p. 115. ®Muskegon County Community College District, By laws , Musketon, Michigan, n.d. 1 2 1 Education of the City of New York, which administers Queensborough Community College, a unit of the City University of New York: Section 6.5 - Appointments without Tenure. Nothing contained in this article shall be construed as conferring or permitting tenure, or service credit toward the achievement of tenure in the positions of . . . department chairman, chief librarian. . . . Section 9.3 11. (b) Each library where size makes it practic able, shall constitute an instructional department of the college. The chairman thereof shall be designated by the presi- ! dent. Such chairman, in addition to the duties of department chairman as enumera- ; ted in paragraph "a1 1 of this section, shall be charged with the administration of the library facilities of his college and shall perform such other duties as the president may assign. Such chairman is hereby authorized to use the additional title of "Chief Librarian." Section 11.7 B. j (2) Assistant Professor. . . . In the ! libraries, for promotion to or appointment as Assistant Professor, the candidate j must, in addition to the requirements of instructor, have completed a doctorate or j an additional Master's degree and in exceptional cases some other logical com bination of two years' graduate study or more beyond the Bachelor's degree. (3) Associate Professor. . . . In the librar ies, for promotion to or appointment as Associate Professor, the candidate must, in addition to the requirements set forth for assistant professors in the libraries, 1 2 2 possess a record of significant achieve ment in his profession. There shall be evidence that his competence and achieve ments are recognized and respected outside his own immediate academic community.^ The omission of a statement in the above by-laws concerning the requirements of librarians for appointment as full professors clearly implies that librarians are not eligible for appointment higher than associate professor. The by-laws of Moorpark (California) College describe in considerable detail the general responsibili ties and specific duties of library staff members, e.g.: Section 103.8 - Director of Library Services A. General Responsibilities The Director of Library Services is responsible to the Dean of Instruction for the development, maintenance, and use of a quality library collection, to include the general collection, reference and bibliographic collections, and audio-visual services. B. Specific Duties (1) Establish and maintain the library collection. (2) Develop policies and procedures governing library services. (3) Prepare the preliminary budget and j financial reports for library services. (4) Supervise classified and certificated personnel on the library staff. j (5) Establish liaison between the college j faculty, students, the community, and the i library staff. j ^New York (City), Board of Higher Education, i By-laws tilew York, 1971. 123 (6 ) Chair the Library Advisory Committee. (7) Furnish students with the opportunity, and the motivation for independent study. (8) Develop a comprehensive multi-media approach to instruction, including respon sibility for the audio-visual center, dial-access equipment, and the learning laboratory located in the library. (9) Instruct in the library curriculum as assigned. (10) Attend meetings of professional library organizations as appropriate, and be responsible for in-service training of the library staff.10 Similar detailed duty assignments and organiza tional responsibilities were outlined for the general reference librarian and the instructional media specialist at this community college. In each of these examples the organizational relationship of the position to the immediate administrative supervisor was stated. Also, there was a general statement of the responsibilities in herent in the position. The enumeration of specific duties paralleled the usual job description. Although there were some obvious exceptions, it would appear that more attention should be given to the place of the library and the position of the head librarian: in the statutes of incorporation and in the by-laws of the individual institutions. Also, education is needed by many! | administrators and librarians concerning the existence and j 10Moorpark College, By-laws. Moorpark, California, :n.d. 124 the applicability of statutes and by-laws. There appeared to be considerable confusion concerning these items in the minds of educators and librarians. The Administrative and Organizational Structure of the Library Organizational Charts. Vertical and horizontal communication as seen in formal organizations was discussed by Richard L. Simpson."*- ' * ' The traditional lines of communi cation in industry, according to Simpson, have been verti cal through a pyramidal type of organization. Under this arrangement, authority is vested at the top, communication originates there and filters downward, and little or no group action is tolerated. On the other hand, horizontal organization is used by those organizations that desire to solve problems cooperatively and wish to coordinate work experience. Generally, community and junior colleges have followed the organizational structures described by Simpson. However, there has been very little information in the literature concerning line and staff organization in! junior colleges. An obvious exception was the line-staff organizational structure suggested by Blocker, Plummer, and! j 11Richard L. Simpson, "Vertical and Horizontal I ; Communication in Formal Organizations," Administrative Science Quarterly. IV (September, 1959), 188-197. j 125 1 2 Richardson. Under this arrangement "the director of community relations and the business manager would occupy a staff relationship with the administrative line officers of the college rather than be classified as line officers 13 themselves." This suggestion was made since these two functions are supporting services necessary for the success of the educational programs of the college but are not central to the basic educational services of the institu tion. Regrettably, as an examination of Chart 2 reveals, this recommended organization failed to show the position of the head librarian in the structure of government. Two earlier organizational charts did include provision for the director of the library. In 1950 Bogue published a vertical organizational chart, which has been a characteristic structure for junior colleges with enrollments of approximately 3,000 students. As seen in Chart 3, the head librarian was responsible to the dean of ; instruction. However, in many smaller institutions there was no vice-president, and the several deans were on a line! level with the business manager and were directly responsible to the chief administrative officer. As a ! l2Clyde E. Blocker, Robert H. Plummer, and Richard C. Richardson, Jr., The Two-Year College: A Social Synthesis (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1965), pp. 176-179. 13Ibid., p. 177. Chart 2 RECOMMENDED LINE-STAFF ORGANIZATION FOR COMMUNITY AND JUNIOR COLLEGES* Board of Control Guidance Personnel Dopartmcnt or Division Chalrmon . Business Manager Director of Community Relation* Faculty (Including guidance personnel) Dean of Students for Vocational or Exploratory Certificate (Includes repair of academic weaknesses) Dean of Technological Science for Associate Degree In Technology (Includes scmlprofesslons) Dean of Liberal Arts and Sciences for Associate Degree In Arts or Sciences Dean of Continuing Education for Certificate In * Continuing Education or Retraining (for adults) Clyde E. Blocker, Robert H. Plummer, and Richard C. Richardson, Jr., The Two-Year College; A Social Synthesis (Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Frentice- Kail, lncr,"T9'b5), p. --------------- Chart 3 STRUCTURE OF THE TYPICAL JUNIOR COLIEGE IN !$£(f- Librarian Bookstore Jipr. Counselors Director of Liberal and Fine Arts Dean ef Extended Day Director of Health Services Dean of Instruction Dean of ?ien Vice President Dean of Culdance Faculty Ces»ittees Dean of Students Executive Council Supt. Buildings and Grounds Division Chalraen Governing Board business Manacer Burser Director of Public Relations Purchasing Asent Director of Vocational and Technical Education Dean ef Ve-eh Executive Head aJesse Bogue, The Community College (New York:. McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1950), p. 286. 127 ! 128: 1 ' I i reorganization project of Grand Rapids (Michigan) Junior j i 14 ! jCollege, John E. Visser, Dean of the College, in 1958-59 developed another administrative structure. The ! | offices listed as non-operative at the time the college I ic I was reorganized were filled as of 1970 and perhaps had j i i ! I been filled a number of years earlier. As seen in Chart j ; 4, the director of library services was administratively i j responsible to the assistant dean of instructional ; affairs. However, this position was comparable to the | ! position of academic dean or dean of instruction at many | j I community colleges since the dean of Grand Rapids Junior i i ! I I |College was the chief administrative officer under the isuperintendent of schools. At most institutions in !states other than Michigan he would have the title of ; 1 president. Many two-year institutions in Michigan were |established and are still operating under a law that ; i permits a school district to establish a junior college. The administrative head of the junior college in a school district, i.e., the dean, reports to the superin- i tendent of schools. He is, in turn, responsible to the i Board of Education. The Board of Education is headed by a •^John E. Visser, "An Experiment in Administrative Reorganization," Junior College Journal. XXXII (September, 1961), 47-52. I 15U. S. Office of Education, Education Directory 11969-1970: Higher Education (Washington, D. C.: iGovernment Printing Office, 1970), p. 193. j C h a r t U ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATIONAL CHART - GRAND RAPIDS JUNIOR COLLEGE, 1958-59a Assistant Dean ef Student Affairs Director ef { Placement * Publication j 4 Public RelatlonsJ Assistant Dean of Instructional Affairs Grand Rapids Board of Education Director of the Evening College Director of Student Activities Registrar and Director of Adelssions Director of Guidance 4 Counseling Co-ordinator Business Affairs Superintendent of Schools Dean of the Junior College Anthropology Econosics Geography His 6ry Political Science Psychology Sociology Chairman Division of Social Sciences Humanities Anatomy 4 Physiology Architecture Botany 4 Forestry Chemistry Engineering Mathematics Microbiology Physics Zoology Co-Chairmen Division of Mathematics and Sciences Hygiene Physical Ed., Coed Physical Ed., Men Physical Ed., Women Chairman Division of Health, Recreation . and Physical Education_____ Suslnevs Studies Drafting Technology Elec Conics Home Economics Mechanical ?#eHanl©gv freed;*! Nurtlng Retailing Secretarial Studies Chairman Division ef Business and Technical Studles__ Offices Currently Ron-Operative John E. Visser, "An Experiment in Administrative Reorganization," Junior College Journal, XXXU (September, 1961), £0. 129 130: president. Because of the involved and complex nature of the board's responsibilities, the title of president for the head of the junior college has been viewed as being inappropriate. Local custom and tradition in Michigan favors the title of dean. This is a well recognized and respected title in the state. The administrative structures in both Chart 3 and Chart 4 have been fairly characteristic of junior college organizations. The former is a more vertical type while the latter is more horizontal. Chart 3 represents a four- : or five-echelon structure; the number of levels depended upon the administrative status of the minor officers. A two- or three-echelon structure is shown in Chart 4; again,! the number of levels depends upon the status of the minor officers and the degree to which the superintendent of schools actually enters into the operation of the college. In both, the head librarian reports directly to the administrative officer who is responsible for the instruc tional program of the institution. In his 1963 doctoral dissertation, Merlin 16 Eisenbise, subsequently President of Cuesta (California) i College, recommended an organizational structure for I Merlin Edwin Eisenbise, "Administrative Organizations and Operational Patterns in Junior Colleges of California" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University ; of Connecticut, 1963), p. 204. j California junior colleges with student enrollments of approximately 3,500. He suggested, as seen in Chart 5, that the vice-president for student personnel, the vice- president for instruction, and the business manager should be on the same level and be directly responsible to the president of the institution. Again, the head librarian would report to the administrative officer who is in charge of the instructional affairs of the college. Only 69 of the 257 community colleges studied in this investigation furnished official organizational charts that portrayed the administrative structures of the institutions. Table 13 gives by state the line relation ships of the directors of library services on these 69 campuses. The library director had a line responsibility 17 to the academic dean at 44 community colleges, or 64 percent. At only 4 institutions, or 6 percent, did the head librarian report directly to the chief administrative officer. The organizational relationship of the head ■IQ librarian as reported by the responding institutions corroborated the official organizational charts. At 54 percent of the community colleges the library director had *L7 Alternate titles were: Administrative Dean of Instruction, Dean, Dean of Academic Affairs, Dean of Arts and Sciences, Dean of Campus, Dean of College Services, Dean of Faculty, Dean of Instruction, Dean of Liberal Arts, Director of Instruction, and Provost. •^Infra. p. 200. Chart 5 RECOMMENDED ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE FOR CALIFORNIA JUNIOR COLLEGES FOR A STUDENT ENROLLMENT OF 3,500a - Governing Board College Council Coordinator for Public Information President Administrative Council Adainis tratlve Assistant Business Manager - Student — Personnel Committee Vice-President Instruction Campus Administrative Committee Vice-President Student Personnel Library Committee Dean of Admissions Records-Research Dean of Counseling and Guidance. Dean of Student Affairs Director of Community Services Dean of Evening ' Division Evening Division Committee Admissions Committee Counseling and Guidance Committee Student Activities Committee Director of Buildings and Crgvnds Coordinators Librarian Business Education Health and Physical Physical Science Mathematics Life Science Social Science Technical and Vocational Education Applied Arts Engineering_______ Education aMerlin Edwin Eisenbise, "Administrative Organization and Operational Patterns in Junior Colleges of California" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Connecticut, 1963), p. 204. i —■ w Table 13 LINE RELATIONSHIP OF THE HEAD LIBRARIAN IN AMERICAN PUBLIC COMMUNITY COLLEGES Chief Adminis- Vice Academic Assistant Dean of Learn- Not on State trative Officer President Dean Dean Resources Chart Total Alabama 3 3 California 7 14 2 23 Florida 1 6 7 Georgia 3 3 Illinois 1 1 Indiana 1 1 Iowa 1 1 1 3 Kentucky 1 1 Maryland 1 1 Michigan 2 1 3 Minnesota 1 1 Mississippi 1 1 New York 2 1 3 North Carolina 3 1 4 Oklahoma 1 1 Oregon 2 1 3 Texas 1 2 1 » 4 Utah 1 1 Virginia 3 3 Washington 1 1 Wvominq 1 1 Total 4 13 44 2 4 2 69 133' 134 a line responsibility to the academic dean. At 14 percent of the institutions he was responsible to the chief administrative officer. Two administrative charts did not 19 include the position of the head librarian. Charts on pages 135-145 are representative of community colleges that are located in different parts of the United States, had varying sizes of student bodies,and were under different types of control. Seven of the 11 charts were for locally controlled community colleges. Another 3 were state controlled, and the last one was con trolled cooperatively by the county and the state. The institutions represented on the charts varied in size from under 1,000 students to more than 15,000 students. An unusual arrangement existed at one small locally controlled community college. According to Chart 6, the librarian had the dual line relationship of reporting to both the dean of applied science and the dean of liberal arts and sciences. Both deans were administratively responsible to the college president. Small state-control led community colleges are depicted in Charts 7 and 9. At these institutions the head librarian reported directly to j the dean of academic affairs. In this way his position was| 19 One librarian noted that she had "asked the President last year where the library was. He said [that] I he guessed it should be alongside the academic instructors j and allowed he hadn't thought much about it." Chart 6 LOCALLY CONTROLLED COMMUNITY COLLEGE LESS THAN 1,000 STUDENTS* librarian Cniintelnra Department Chairmen Coordtnatora Faculty Director of Admissions- Registrar Business Manager Clerk Supervisors* Building end Grounds Bookstore 1 Dean of Students Dean of Women Student Advisory Faculty Committees and Advisory Secretary to the President Administrative Council Instruetlnnnl Council Dean of Applied Selencc (Voc.-Tech.) Dean of Liberal Arts and Sciences (LDC.) Director of Computing Center Director of Special Programs Director of Evening School Board of Directors Blue Mountain Arch Educational District Umatilla and Horrow Counties aBluo Mountain Community College, Pondoleton, Oregon. Chart 7 STATE CONTROLLED COMMUNITY COLLEGE LESS THAN 1,000 STUDENTS3 Clerical Staff Lecturers Manager of Bookstore Bookstore Personnel Director of Financial Aid —| Manager of Cafeteria Counselor Cafeteria Personnel —^ Secretary to the Dean Grounds Maintenance Personnel H U Security Personnel CORPS OF INSTRUCTION Division of Humanities Division of Nat. Science Division of Phys. Ed. Division of Nursinc Librarian Division of Soc. Science Secretary to the Dean Faculty Secretaries Division of Business Aden, Secretary to the Dlrec tar Secretary to the President Associate Librarians BRUNSWICK COLLEGE FOUNDATION. INC. Clerical & Secretarial Staff DIRECTOR OF CONTINUING EDUCATION DEAN OF ACADEMIC AFFAIRS DEAN OF STUDENT AFFATRS Assistant Dean of Student Affairs Director of Admissions & Registrar Admissions & Records Clerical Staff Plant Operations & Maintenance Supervisory Personnel Director of Plant Operations & Maintenance CHANCELLOR UNIVERSITY SYSTEM Building & Maintenance Personnel Assistant Comptroller A Director of Auxiliary Services PRESIDENT BRUNSWICK JUNIOR COLLEGE BOARD OF REGENTS UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF CEORGIA -M. (JO 0\ ^Brunswick Junior College, Brunswick, Georgia. Chart 8 LOCALLY CONTROLLED COMMUNITY COLLEGE 1,000 - 2,h99 STUDENTS3 , Dean of Instruction Ass't. Dean Occupational Education President THE PEOPLE Dean, Manager, Student Union Book Store Director, Systeas & Research Director, Public Information Director, Financial Aids Dean of Student Affairs Director, Coaetualty Serricea • Director, Adnlsslons Director, Student Activities Director, Counseling Director, Personnel Superintendent of Maintenance Director. Foreign Student Affairs District Board of Trustees Tallahassee Connrmnity College, Tallahassee, Florida. 137 Chart 9 STATE CONTROLLED COMMUNITY COLLEGE 1,000 - 2,A99 STUDENTS3 State Board of Education Guidance Counseling Student Activities Personnel Service Food Service 6 Bookstore Bursar Financial a h Buildings 4 Grounds Admissions & Registrar Transportseico Research Dean Div. of Soc. Sci, Div. of Lang. Arts Div. of Sc. Hh*, Pre-Sag Div. of Fine Arts Div. of Even. Stud Librarian Business Manager and Treasurer Dean of Students State Superintendent of Education Instructors Alexander City State Junior College, Alexander City, Alabama. 138 Chart 10 LOCALLY CONTROLLED COMMUNITY COLLEGE 2,500 ” 4,999 STUDENTS* College District Voters Board of Regents Public Information Chief Executive Personnel & Administrative Services Director President Asst, to the President Academic Affairs• Finance & Business Affairs Vice President of the College Vice President Student Services Director Registration & Admission Registrar Plant Operation & Maintenance Director of Physical Facilities Business Mgt. & Accounting Controller Departments Division of Division of Division of Buildings & Purchasing Accounting Auxiliary Arts and Sciences Fine Arts Tech. & Voc. Ed. Grounds Property Acctg. Chief Enterprises Dean Dean Dean Superintendent Supervisor Accountant Supervisor Departments r Applied Science Programs Asst. Dean I Programs Chairman Voc. & Adult Programs. Ed. Asst. Dean Programs Chairman +-> l a vo -Del-Mar-Coliege,. Corpus Christi,„Texas. Chart 11 STATE AND COUNTY CONTROLLED COMMUNITY COLLEGE 2,500 - 4,999 STUDENTS3 9 U U Cslwiity M d a Catfltj AJU aLJSLUK UiUEL KTCC Board ei President of tho FOcnlty Ort*el«otio»i Qvll Sorrle* Oosoiflod Btployw JUooelxto Doan of Dlroeter of Stodont Firunclol Aid Ssjlitrir i Dlroctor of Znotltutloeaj Clnieter of ' E v o n l c c btoMloa Clrll Sarrlco Clutinod frploy Chalnsan, Jhyvlcal V ocation Profroo iiiwliti 9««a of Students Ttnofflti Sorriest o&pleyM of ffecolly-Stodect Association aMohawk Valley Community College, Utica, New York. 140 Chart 12 LOCALLY CONTROLLED COMMUNITY COLLEGE 5,000 - 7,499 STUDENTS3 ^ Faculty ] Staff Groundsmen Custodians Accountant Payroll Clerks Purchasing Assistant Head Librarian Maintenance Division Chairmen Business Manager Dean of Students Board of Trustees Dean of Instruction Director of Data Processing Dean of Technical Education President-Superintendent • Public Information ______Officer_____ Coordinator ot Technical Education Supervisor of Buildings & Grounds Director of New Building ______Coordination______ Dean of Evening Division and Community Service Coordinator of Instructional Services aMonterey Peninsula College, Monterey, California. 141 Chart 13 STATE CONTROLLED COMMUNITY COLLEGE 5,000 - 7,1*99 STUDENTS3- STATE BOARD FOR COMMUNITY COLLECES College Board College Fotua # Dean of Financial and Admlnlefratlve Services Administrative Data Processing Manager Coordinator of Inatltutlnnal Research Coordinator of Planning I Dovelonment Chief Accountant Accounting, Peraonnel, Purchas ing. Stores. Ccn traLHccorda Adainlatratlva Aaalatant Coordinator of Instructional Programs Provoat Campus Bualneaa Hanager Bookstore Hanager Director of Learntng Resources Librarians Coordinator of A.V, Services Coordinator of Learning Lab Director of Continuing F.ducatlon Aaalatant Director of Continuing ^duration E J Chairman, Division of Bnalness Sciences Chairman, Division of LnElncerlng Trchnoloylea Chairman, Division of Health Technologies Chairman, Division n( Public Health lechnoloples Dean of Student Services Coordinator of Admissions and Records Coordinator of Student Activities Coordinator of CounselIng Services Counselors Student Health HuTae Chairman* Division of llumanltlea Chairman, Division of N.lur.l .TfUnm.* .HlIhcmllCB Chairman, Dtvleion of Chairman, Division of Developmental Sclencaa aNorthem Virginia Community College, Annandale, Virginia. Chart l i t LOCALLY CONTROLLED COMMUNITY COLLEGE 7,500 - 9,999 STUDENTS3 xIndicates part time position Business Manager Dean of Students Coordin. Com. Ser Campus Architect Director Placement' Associate Dean College Nurse Chairman Counseling Director Athletics2 Assistant Deanx (2) Associate Dean Dean of Admissions Board of Trustees Administrative Dean Librarian Cafeteria Manager Coordin. ~ Voc. Educ Asst. Bus Manager Bookstore Manager Division Chairmen Dept. Heads Dean of Instruction President/Superintendent Dean of Ext. Day & Sum. Ses CLASSIFIED STAFF a R i v e r s i d e C i t y C o l l e g e , R i v e r s i d e , C a l i f o r n i a Chart 1'5 LOCALLY CONTROLLED COMMUNITY COLLEGE 10,000 - 14,999 STUDENTS3 THE PEOPLE Board of Trustees District Superintendent President — Chabot College COLLEGE COMMITTEES Community Services Curriculua Library Student Personnel Director of Cornunity Services Coordinator of Comuaitv Services DEAN OF STUDENT PERSONNEL I Administrative Assistant FACULTY SENATE DEAN OF INSTRUCTION Associate' Dean of Student Personnel -Director Counseling and Guidance —Placement Advisor Coordinator of Special Student Services Registrar Director of Student Activities -Coordinator, Student Activities Chairman of Athletics Bookstore Manager DEAN OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BUSINESS MANAGER Associate Dean - Arts and Sciences -Chairman, Div. of Humanities _ -Chairman, Div. of Language Arts -Chairman, Div. of Physical Education —Chairman, Div. of Science and Mathematics -Chairman, Div. of Social Sciences Associate Dean — Evening and Extension Operations -Coordinator, Evening and Extension Operations Associate Dean - Technical-Vocational Education -Coordinator, Technical-Vocational Education —Chairman, Div. of Business -Chairman, Div. of Engineering -Chairman, Div. of Health Services —Chairman, Div. of Industrial Technology -Chairman, Div. of Public Services Director - Library Services -Coordinator, Audio-Visual Services _ Business Assistant - Purchasing Assistant Supervisor-Building and Grounds - Manager-Cafeteria Manager-Data Processing Center Chabot College, Hayward, California,' 144 Chart 16 145: LOCALLY CONTROLLED COMMUNITY COLLEGE OVER 15,000 STUDENTS3 Donn of Extended Dnv____ Denn of Women Denn - dclmvloral Sclenccn Denn - Industry A Technology Denn - Commun 1' cat tons Denn - Phynlcnl Sciences Director Security Student Store Manager Denn - Pltyn. Educ. A Athleticn Denn - Finn Arte Denn - Dunlncns Education Denn - Soclnl Sciences Director Food Services Dean - Natural Sciences Doan - Dunlncns Affairs Denn - llumnnittcn Coordinator Community Services Coordinator Dcncnrch & Placement Purchasing Supervisor Denn of Counseling A Plnccmont Coord Inn tor Athlctlen A Recreation Coordinator Public Information Coordinator Nursing Coordinators Student Activities CoordInator Library Coordinator Instruction Curriculum ■ Coordinator Admissions' A Records Denn (}f Admins Ions A Records Board of Trustees Vice President Student Personnel Vico President Business Vice President Instruction DISTRICT ELECTORATE • nEl Camino College, El Camino, California, i 146 similar to that of the divisional chairmen since they, also, were administratively responsible to the dean. Chart lO pictures the organizational structure of an academic institution in which a vice-president, who was responsible for the academic affairs of the college, filled the position often held by the academic dean. On this campus the director of the library, who did not have the title of dean, appeared to be on the same level as others who had it. The library director was responsible to the dean of instruction at the community colleges structured in Charts 11 and 12. The provost appeared to be an important figure on the campus portrayed in Chart 13. Reporting to the provost were the dean of student services, the director of continuing education, the director of learning resources, and the department chairmen. Librarians, the coordinator of audio-visual services, and the coordinator of the learning laboratory were under the direction of the director of learning resources. Chart 14 depicts a some what larger institution in which there was ,an administra tive dean who was responsible to the president. There were i four other deans, including the dean of instruction, who j i appeared to be equal and who reported directly to the i administrative dean. Under this arrangement the librarian ! was organizationally responsible to the dean of instruc- | tion. Chart 15 included the director of library services j along with the associate deans of the college under the 147 dean of instruction. This arrangement would lead one to believe that the director of library services should also be an associate dean; however, this was not the case. One of the larger community colleges is represented by Chart 16. At this institution the vice-president was in charge of instruction, being responsible to the college president.; His duties were comparable to those of a dean of instruc tion on many campuses as the departmental chairmen and the head librarian reported directly to him. There was, how- j ever, a significant difference. Although the chairman of each academic department had the title of dean, the director of the library had the title of coordinator along with the coordinator of instruction-curriculum. Since each of the other five coordinators was organizationally responsible to a vice-president through a dean, whereas the; head librarian reported directly to the vice-president in charge of instruction, it would follow that the title for the position should be dean of the library. From the foregoing it would appear that the posi tion of the library and the head librarian stood relatively! i high in the structure of the American public community \ : ! college movement. Generally, the director of the library was on a level with the departmental/divisional chairmen of academic disciplines; however, he was not always granted an administrative title equal to those the department chairmen received. In a few situations, usually in the larger i 148; institutions, he had an organizational position somewhat higher than the divisional chairmen; again, he did not have the title commensurate with his level on the chart. By and large, however, this should augur favorably for the health of the community college library. Whether or not this assumption becomes a reality can be determined only by examining more closely specific aspects of library admin istration on college campuses. For example, such facets are given a closer and more detailed scrutiny later in this- chapter; such topics are considered as the multi-faceted role of the community college library, the library’s per- j centage share of the educational budget of the institution,; the head librarian's span of administrative control, the participatory involvement of the administration and the j faculty in the affairs of the library, and the head librarian's communication with the faculty and adminis tration. Organizational Patterns within the Library. When the organizational structure within the community college library was examined, considerable variations were noted i i despite the fact that a substantial majority of the j I libraries followed either one or the other of two standard patterns. As seen in Table 14, 139, or 60.7 percent of the reporting libraries, had a single traditional type of functional library organization with separate departments of cataloging, circulation, and reference. Little Table 14 ORGANIZATIONAL PATTERNS WITHIN COMMUNITY COLLEGE LIBRARIES Single Multiple Responses Total Responses Pattern Response (N = 25) (N = 254) No. % No. % No. % There is little or no organization or depart mentalization; duties and responsibilities are assigned to the staff member who has the time or can perform them best. 80 34.93 8 32 88 34.65 The traditional type of functional organization is used with separate departments of catalog ing (including acquisi tions ), circulation» and reference (or by com bining the latter two). 139 61.0 19 76 158 62.2 Organization is by act ivity or process, e.g., photoduplication and book repair. 8 3.49 8 32 16 6.3 Departments are organi zed by form of material, e.g., separate divi- Organization is by act ivity or process, e.g., photoduplication and book repair. 8 3.49 8 32 16 6.3 Departments are organi zed by form of material, e.g., separate divi sions for serials, doc uments, and special collections. 1 0.44 15 . 60 16 6.3 Library is organized into departmental libraries on the basis of subject. - 2 8 2 0.79 Library is organized into departmental libraries on the basis of geography. - 1 4 1 0.39 Library is organized into the pragmatic areas of production, processing, and utilization. 1 0.44 - - 1 0.39 Total 229 100.0 aDefinition of terms on this and subsequent tables: single response: only one answer given by respondent; multiple responses: summary of those respondents who checked two or more patterns; and total responses: summary of single and multiple responses. J W v > • — w W W \ / t / ^ Library is organized into departmental libraries on the basis of geography. --- 1 4 1 0.39 Library is organized into the pragmatic areas of production, processing, and utilization. 1 0.44 - - 1 0.39 Total 229 100.0 aDefinition of terms on this and subsequent tables: single response: - - only one answer given by respondent; multiple responses: summary of those respondents who checked two or more patterns; and total responses: summary of single and multiple responses. 149 ) 150 departmentalization was evident in 80 libraries, or 34.93 percent, which assigned duties and responsibilities to those staff members who either could perform the tasks most satisfactorily or had the time to accept the assignment. An organization by specific activity or process, e.g., book repair, photoduplication, etc., was reported by 8 libraries, or 3.49 percent. Only 25 libraries, or 9.84 percent, said that they attempted to integrate two or three of the suggested organizational patterns. Administration of Audio-Visual Services. Although this was not a major purpose of the investigation, an attempt was made to determine whether or not the library was primarily responsible for the audio-visual services available on community college campuses. Table 15 shows that a majority of the libraries administered these ser vices without assistance from any other organized depart ment on the campus. However, on 51 campuses, or 20 percent^ these services were performed by separate audio-visual departments, which ha<j been established for that specific purpose. Almost one-half of these independent audio-visual departments were housed within the library building but were not administratively controlled or related to the library. The library and another separate department or unit provided audio-visual services that were generally complementary to each other with a minimum of duplication ion 23 campuses, or 9 percent. On the other hand, however, 151 Table 15 ADMINISTRATION OF AUDIO-VISUAL SERVICES IN COMMUNITY COLLEGES Administrative Control Number Percentage The community college library 148 58 A separate audio-visual depart ment which is located in the library building 25 10 A separate audio-visual depart ment which is located outside of the library building 26 10 The academic departments(s) of the college 4 2 The library and. other unit(s) provide separate audio-visual services which are complimen tary to each other 23 9 The library and other unit(s) provide separate audio-visual services which duplicate each other 29 11 Total 255 100 152 at 29 colleges, or 11 percent, there was a duplication of audio-visual services, in whole or in part, by the library and the other unit. Comparing Table 16 with Table 17 clearly reveals the differences between the audio-visual services adminis tered by the library and those supervised by departments other than the library. Whereas 232 libraries, or 91 percent, had microforms and microfilm readers and/or printers, only 11 departments outside the library, or 7 percent, had these items. Similarly, phonorecords were located in 208 libraries, or 85 percent, but only 56 out- of-library departments, or 36 percent, included phono records in their inventories. There was not such a wide divergence in the holdings of films, transparencies, and dial access systems; these were located in both areas in similar proportions. Such services as photography, graphics, and television were more likely to be found in I an audio-visual service that was not administered by the library. The Role of the Library : I There appeared to be clear evidence that the head ! j librarians of two-year colleges had an adequate under- ! : I standing of the multi-faceted role of the community college! library. However, their estimate of how effectively the libraries were fulfilling their roles was somewhat less j Table 16 AUDIO-VISUAL SERVICES ADMINISTERED BY THE LIBRARY Media Single Response No. % Multiple Responses (N = 236) No. % Total Responses (N = 245) No. % Phonorecords 1 11 207 88 208 85 Films - — 143 61 143 58 Film strips - — 171 72 171 70 Picture file — — 117 50 117 48 Microforms and reader/printers 7 78 125 53 232 95 Transparencies - — 143 61 143 58 Photocopy services 1 11 188 80 189 77 Magnetic tapes - — 165 70 165 67 Turntables — — 165 70 165 67 Tape recorders/players - — 173 73 173 71 Dial Access system - — 35 15 35 14 Photographic services - — 73 31 73 30 Graphics - — 74 31 74 30 Realia - — 47 20 47 19 Television — — 80 34 80 33 Other3- — — 26 11 26 11 Total 9 100 aIncludes: language/listening laboratory, art prints, slides, microfilm camera, video tape/camera, film loops, reading machines, etc. Total 9 100 aIncludes: language/listening laboratory, art prints, slides, microfilm camera, video tape/camera, film loops, reading machines, etc. Table 17 AUDIO-VISUAL SERVICES ADMINISTERED BY DEPARTMENTS OTHER THAN THE LIBRARY Multiple Total Single Responses Responses Media Response •CN = 132) (N = 154) No. % No. % No. % Phonorecords 1 4.5 55 42 56 36 Films - ------- 88 67 88 57 Film strips - ------- 83 63 83 54 Picture file — --- 15 11 15 10 Microforms and reader/printers - --- 11 8 11 7 Transparencies 2 9.0 97 73 99 64 Photocopy services 3 13.5 56 42 59 38 Magnetic tapes - --- 67 51 67 44 Turntables — ------- 69 52 69 45 Tape recorders/players - --- 87 66 87 56 Dial Access system - 23 17 23 15 Photographic services 6 27.5 88 67 94 61 Graphics 3 13.5 87 66 90 58 Realia 1 4.5 24 18 25 16 Television 6 27.5 94 71 100 65 Other3- - ---- 7 5 7 5 Total 22 100.0 aIncludes: language/listening laboratory, study skills laboratory, steno laboratory, music laboratory, auto-tutorial, etc. Phonorecords 1 4.5 55 42 56 36 Films - ------- 88 67 88 57 Film strips - — - 83 63 83 54 Picture file — --- 15 11 15 10 Microforms and reader/printers - --- 11 8 11 7 Transparencies 2 9.0 97 73 99 64 Photocopy services 3 13.5 56 42 59 38 Magnetic tapes - — - 67 51 67 44 Turntables — ------- 69 52 69 45 Tape recorders/players - --- 87 66 87 56 Dial Access system - --- 23 17 23 15 Photographic services 6 27.5 88 67 94 61 Graphics 3 13.5 87 66 90 58 Realia 1 4.5 24 18 25 16 Television 6 27.5 94 71 100 65 Othera — ---- 7 5 7 5 Total 22 100.0 aIncludes: language/listening laboratory, study skill? laboratory, steno laboratory, music laboratory, auto-tutorial, etc. 153 154 optimistic. In all cases the ranking of the pertinency of the role was higher than the fulfillment of the role. Table 18 shows their rating of several specific statements in an attempt to determine what the library directors conceive the several roles of the community college library to be. The fulfillment of this manysided role, as viewed by the head librarians, is evaluated in Table 19. A most interesting observation can be made. Whereas only 44 respondents held the opinion that the community college library had as a role the responsibility of meeting the 20 full curricular needs of all enrolled students, 243 respondents evaluated the success of the library in ful filling this role. Using as a base the high correlation between the total number of libraries that designated these as appropriate roles and the median ranking of these roles, Table 18 identified the most significant roles for the community college library as these: (l) to facilitate the use of library materials by organization and service, (2) to teach the use of books and libraries, and (3) to give each student the opportunity to gain a well-rounded reading experience that is supplementary to the curricular emphases 2^The library is expected to develop a collection :of library materials which will support the teaching program of the institution as reflected in the curriculum. Table 18 THE ROLE OF THE COMMUNITY COLLEGE LIBRARY (N = 244) Role 0 1 Rank 2 3 4 Mode Median Total Libraries Meet the full curricular needs of all students 1 2 2 25 14 3 3 44 Keep faculty bibliographi- cally current in their fields 9 13 77 96 47 3 3 242 Help faculty make original contributions to their dis ciplines within the pur poses of the college 30 34 93 56 27 2 2 242 Include materials related to historical development of the college and the area served 8 29 98 75 32 2 2 240 Opportunity for each stu dent to gain a well-round ed reading experience (additional to curricular emphases) 5 38 97 103 3 3 243 Teach the use of books and libraries 1 2 36 96 102 4 3 237 Facilitate use of library materials by organization and service 1 2 17 56 161 4 4 237 Opportunity for each stu dent to gain a well-round ed reading experience (additional to curricular emphases) Teach the use of books and libraries F a c i l i t a t e u s e o f l i b r a r y m a t e r i a l s b y o r g a n i z a t i o n a n d s e r v i c e Sponsor library-related activities to reach all students Evaluate effectiveness of library program and services Other: Meet community library needs not other wise met Provide effec tive innovation Train library technicains for service in the community_________ 5 38 97 103 1 2 36 96 102 1 2 17 56 161 16 28 87 62 41 2 8 44 93 86 - - 1 4 1 3 3 243 4 3 237 4 4 237 2 2 234 3 3 232 3 3 6 4 4 1. 3 3 1 Rank: 0 = not an important role; 1 = little importance; 2 = moderately important _______role: 3 = very important role; 4 = major role._____________________________ or HDrary program ana services 8 44 93 86 232 Other: Meet community library needs not other wise met - - 1 4 1 3 3 6 Provide effec tive innovation _ _ _ _ i 4 4 1 Train library technicains for service in the community____________ -_____-_____-_____1____-_______3 3___________ 1 Rank: 0 = not an important role; 1 = little importance; 2 = moderately important ___________ role: 3 = very important role; 4 = major role._____________________________ 155 Table 19 FULFILLMENT OF THE ROLE OF THE COMMUNITY COLLEGE LIBRARY (N = 244) Role 0 1 Rank 2 3 4 Mode Median Total Libraries Meet the full curricular needs of all students 2 10 51 129 51 3 3 243 Keep faculty bibliograph- ically current in their fields 15 44 88 75 21 2 2 243 Help faculty make origi nal contributions to their disciplines within the purposes of the college 40 62 67 48 18 2 2 235 Include materials related to historical development of the college and the area served 10 42 75 78 27 3 2 232 Opportunity for each stu dent to gain a well- rounded reading experience (additional to curricular emphases) 5 16 68 102 52 3 3 243 Teach the use of books and libraries 8 30 83 86 33 3 2 240 Par.ilit.at.p n«;<=> n-f 1 Th-rAT-w area served 10 42 75 78 27 3 2 232 Opportunity for each stu dent to gain a well- rounded reading experience (additional to curricular emphases) 5 16 68 102 52 3 3 243 Teach the use of books and libraries 8 30 83 86 33 3 2 240 Facilitate use of library materials by organization and service 1 7 36 116 76 3 3 236 Sponsor library-related activities to reach all students 62 59 67 33 13 2 2 234 Evaluate effectiveness of library program and services 11 42 75 73 27 2 2 228 Other: Meet community library needs not otherwise met - - - 2 - 3 3 3 Original art exhibits in library regularly 3 3 1 Train library technicians for service in community_________________-_____-_____-_____1____-_______3__________3__________ 1_ Rank; 0 = poorly; 1 = fairly; 2 = well; 3 = very well; 4 = excellently. Evaluate effectiveness of library program and services 11 42 75 Other: Meet community library needs not otherwise met - Original art exhibits in library regularly - Train library technicians for service in community_________________-_____-____ - Rank: 0 = poorly; 1 = fairly; 2 = well; 73 27 2 2 228 2 - 3 3 3 1 - 3 3 1 1 ________3________ 3___________ 1 3 = very well; 4 = excellently.______ 156 of the institution.^ The median rankings for these roles were 4, 3, and 3, respectively. Although 240 respondents indicated that it was a role of the library to assist faculty members in making original contributions to their respective disciplines within the purposes of the college and the community, they rated this as only a moderately important role, i.e., the median was 2. This judgment would be expected in a junior college whose basic philoso phy and purpose as related to research would be unlike that of a university. The total number of libraries that evaluated the fulfillment of the various roles of the community college library was quite highj the range varied from 228 to 243. However, the adequacy of meeting these roles effectively was rated fairly low. There was the belief that the library fulfilled its role very well in only one area, namely, the facilitation of the use of library materials by efficient organization and service. In meeting the full curricular needs of all college students and in giving them an opportunity to gain a well-rounded reading experience that was largely supplementary to the curricular emphases of the institution, the community college libraries were judged to fulfill their suggested roles quite well. 21 Although important and interesting, it was not the purpose of this investigation to attempt to discover the extent that teaching and the library are integrated. The medians for these roles were both 3. In addition to developing a collection of library materials that supports the teaching program of the college as reflected in the curriculum, the library staff is also concerned with the development of a well-rounded collection in all subject areas. A basic junior college philosophy is that learning ; occurs through non-curricular reading as well as curricular reading. The fulfillment levels were much lower in two areas; other than those described above: (l) the help that was given to faculty members in order to enable them to make original contributions to their disciplines within the purposes of the college (median of 2), and (2) the sponsor-i ing of library-related activities in an attempt to reach all students (median of 2). Financial Support of the Library Usually, the interest of the administration of a community college in its library services can be gauged quite well by the financial support it gives to the library. However, this gauge can sometimes be skewed when j I the institution is either quite new or very small. \ Expenditures as a Percentage of Institutional I Expenditures. An attempt was made to determine the com parative figures for all of the institutions that were I examined in this study. However, as seen in Table 20, j 159 Table 20 LIBRARY EXPENDITURES AS A PERCENTAGE OF EDUCATIONAL AND GENERAL EXPENDITURES— AMERICAN PUBLIC COMMUNITY COLLEGES Number of Institutions Percentaqe 1963-64* 1967-68° 1968-69° 17.0 and aboved 2 2 1 . 16.0 - 16.9 - 1 - 15.0 - 15.9 - - - 14.0 - 14.9 1 3 - 13.0 - 13.9 - 2 3 12.0 - 12.9 3 2 4 11.0 - 11.9 1 - 6 10.0 - 10.9 - 7 3 9.0 - 9.9 2 7 7 8.0 - 8.9 4 9 4 7.0 - 7.9 5 10 13 6.0 - 6.9 11 15 14 5.0 - 5.9 13 25 23 4.0 - 4.9 25 30 39 3.0 - 3.9 18 30 31 2.0 - 2.9 21 19 16 1.0 - 1.9 1 4 4 Under 1.0 - - - Total 107 166 170 Mean 5.24 5.86 5.57 Median 4.2 4.95 4.9 aU. S. Office of Education, Librarv Statistics of Colleges and Universities, 1963-64; Institutional Data (Washington, D. C. : Government Printing Office, 1965), pp. 132-156' • t>u. S. Office of Education, Librarv Statistics of Colleges and Universities; Data for Individual Institu- tions, Fall. 1967 (Washington, D. C. ; Government Printing Office, 1969), pp. 155-191. CU. S. Office of Education, Librarv Statistics of Colleges and Universities; Data for Individual Institu- tions, Fall. 1968 (Washington, D. C. ; Government Printing Office, 1969), pp. 37-68. ^Percentages varied from 17.1 to 27.3. i ..J published statistics were available for a maximum of only j | 170, or 66 percent, of the 257 participants. There is i i evidence that the level of support for community college j i libraries has remained relatively stable. Although the | ! i t mean was consistently somewhat above the recommended 5 22 percent support level, the median remained consistently below this percentage. However, there had been a fairly j significant increase in the median from 4.2 percent in j 1963-64 to approximately 4.9 percent during the years of j i 1967-69. During the earlier period, 61 percent of the libraries received less than 5 percent of the educational and general expenditures of their respective institutions. Within 5 years this ratio had decreased to approximately 50 percent. An encouraging observation was that whereas j less than 6 percent of the libraries received 10 percent j or more of their respective institutions' budgets in 1963- j 64, within the next years the number of libraries which j j received 10 percent or more of their institutions' budgets ! had increased to 10 percent. i 22 i American Library Association. Association of i College and Research Libraries. Committee on Standards. "Standards for Junior College Libraries," College and Research Libraries. XXI (May, I960), 201. However, the 1972 standards are qualitative not quantitative, cf., American Association of Junior Colleges and Association of College Research Libraries. "AAJC-ACRL Guidelines for Two- Year College Library Learning Resource Centers," College and Research Libraries News. XXXII (October, 1971), 265- 278. There was a particularly significant correlation between the student enrollment at individual community colleges and the percentage of the institutions' education al and general expenditures that were budgeted for library operations. Generally, those colleges that had small student enrollments budgeted for library services a greater percentage of the institutions' expenditures than community colleges with larger enrollments. A logical explanation is that a library needs a basic core collection and a staff of: minimum size regardless of the size of its student body. Larger institutions need to secure multiple copies of heavily used books and additional staff members to service ; the greater number of students. However, the percentage of: the institution's operating expenses that the library receives will usually be less than for a smaller college. As seen in Table 21, those institutions that allocated 10 percent or more of the educational and general budget for library services had an average enrollment of 1,301 students. On the other hand, according to Table 22, those institutions that budgeted less than 3 percent of their annual expenditures for the library had an average enroll- j ment of 5,644 students (the median enrollment was 3,781). However, the actual library operating expenditures were I almost identical for both groups. For the smaller | institutions the mean was $87,196 and the median was i $83,563. The corresponding amounts for the larger Table 21— COMMUNITY COLLEGES WITH MORE THAN 10 PERCENT OF THE BUDGET ALLOCATED TO THE LIBRARY Institutions Student Librarv Expenditures' 3 Book Annual bv State Enrollment3 Total Books, etc. Holdinqs*5 Acquisitions ALABAMA Enterprise State J.C. 1,164 $70,517 $41,998 14,222 8,994 ARIZONA Cochise College 1,503 88,130 25,OOO 21,246 3,814 CALIFORNIA Moorpark J.C. 3,693 139,516 69,389 12,974 9,469 FLORIDA Tallahassee J.C. 1,735 106,436 68,766 10,116 6,616 Valencia J.C. 1,761 93,523 56,880 5,927 4,902 GEORGIA Gainesville, J.C. 817 84,548 50,257 12,004 6,887 Kennesaw J.C. 1,358 154,422 101,060 16,020 10,197 MARYLAND Allegany C.C. 535 53,056 24,656 23,375 3,315 MASSACHUSETTS Mount Wachusett C.C. 1,299 57,361 30,497 9,943 3,436 MISSISSIPPI Meridian J.C. 1,286 82,577 17,896 12,656 2,237 NORTH CAROLINA Richmond Technical Inst. 359 37,463 26,730 2,792 1,492 Western Piedmont C.C. 1,060 71,930 46,599 13,063 5,604 SOUTH CAROLINA Greenville Tech11, Ed 811 118,500 85,000 12,672 6,172 TEXAS Panola College 584 37,828 19,980 12,840 2,118 VIRGINIA Central Virginia C.C. 1,023 58,969 32,981 5,934 694 WASHINGTON Bellevue C.C. 1.829 140,366 67,980 23.153 7,246 Mean if_ _ _sj_ _ _ 1,301 i nnr $87,196 Anrt r / - o $47,854 A 4 J A 13.058 5,199 SOUTH CAROLINA Greenville Tech’l, Ed. 811 118,500 85,000 12,672 6,172 TEXAS Panola College 584 37,828 19,980 12,840 2,118 VIRGINIA Central Virginia C.C. 1,023 58,969 32,981 5,934 694 WASHINGTON Bellevue C.C. 1.829 140,366 67,980 23.153 7,246 Mean 1.301 $87,196 $47,854 13,058 5,199 Median 1,225 $83,563 $44,299 12.816 5,610 aU. S. Office of Education, Education Directory, 1969-1970: Higher Education (Washington, D. C.: Government Printing Office, 1970). bU. S. Office of Education, Library Statistics of Colleges and Universities: Data for Individual Institutions, Fall. 1968 (Washington, D. C.: Government Printing Qffice^j-969), pp. 5-68. ______ ________ Table 22— COMMUNITY COLLEGES WITH LESS THAN 3 PERCENT OF THE BUDGET ALLOCATED TO THE LIBRARY Institutions Student Librarv Expenditures13 Book Annual by State________________Enrollment3- Total_____Books, etc. Holdings^ Acquisitions^3 ARIZONA Arizona Western Col. 2,175 $58,818 $20,969 24,071 3,054 CALIFORNIA Cerritos College 10,997 121,765 33,630 40,537 4,961 Col. of the Sequoias 6,931 74,477 26,091 40,122 4,257 Contra Costa College 5,627 82,601 23,020 38,532 5,365 Diablo Valley College 10,701 115,372 28,575 45,361 4,488 Laney College 8,727 98,323 24,000 22,152 4,237 L. A. Pierce College 14,128 158,787 54,441 58,071 5,163 Pasadena City College 13,658 204,883 34,588 85,853 6,636 Reedley College 1,922 67,259 26,262 16,578 2,079 San Diego J.C. 3,804 246,063 61,670 67,638 10,293 ILLINOIS Morton College 3,004 33,000 13,000 21,810 1,214 INDIANA Vincennes University 3,757 45,112 20,032 22,726 2,838 IOWA North Iowa Area C.C. 1,674 60,694 24,720 24,211 4,073 KANSAS Hutchinson Com. J.C. 1,910 30,216 11,200 19,149 2,354 MICHIGAN Jackson C.C. 3,302 52,626 9,450 17,979 2.034 ^ — va/ ni" iuinjlxx ^UJULiiULS WITH LESS THAN 3 PERCENT OF THE BUDGET ALLOCATED TO THE LIBRARY Institutions- Student Library Expenditures^B o o k A n n u a l by State________________ Enrollment3- Total_____Books, etc. ____Holdings*3 Acquisitions*3 ARIZONA Arizona Western Col. 2,175 $58,818 $20,969 24,071 3,054 CALIFORNIA Cerritos College 10,997 121,765 33,630 40,537 4,961 Col. of the Sequoias 6,931 74,477 26,091 40,122 4,257 Contra Costa College 5,627 82,601 23,020 38,532 5,365 Diablo Valley College 10,701 115,372 28,575 45,361 4,488 Laney College 8,727 98,323 24,000 22,152 4,237 L. A. Pierce College 14,128 158,787 54,441 58,071 5,163 Pasadena City College 13,658 204,883 34,588 85,853 6,636 Reedley College 1,922 67,259 26,262 16,578 2,079 Sain Diego J.C. 3,804 246,063 61,670 67,638 10,293 ILLINOIS Morton College 3,004 33,000 13,000 21,810 1,214 INDIANA Vincennes University 3,757 45,112 20,032 22,726 2,838 IOWA North Iowa Area C.C. 1,674 60,694 24,720 24,211 4,073 KANSAS Hutchinson Com. J.C. 1,910 30,216 11,200 19,149 2,354 MICHIGAN Jackson C.C. 3,302 52,626 9,450 17,979 2,034 TEXAS Amarillo College 3,509 56,957 22,162 28,154 2,382 Laredo J.C. 1,357 45,567 19,558 25,268 2,084 WASHINGTON Big Bend C.C. * 1,115 51,276 24,419 14,079 2,500 Skagit Valley College 2,591 76,160 23,842 26,967 3,820 Spokane C.C. 4,406 79,829 38,525 33,603 1,075 WISCONSIN Madison Area Tech. C. 4,474 69,852 43,698 12,789 1,551 Milwaukee Tech. Col. 9,218 102,240 19,340 28,566 3,342 Mean___________________5,408______$87,812_____$27,218______32,491_______ 3,627 Median_________________3,781______$73,006 $24,210______26,118_______ 3,198 a and b (see above Table 21)._______ ________________________________________ 163 institutions were $87,722 and $73,006. Therefore, it seems| evident that the libraries in the larger community colleges should receive a greater percentage of their institutions' budgets in order to provide more adequate financial support for their library services. Clearly, expenditures for books and other library materials were considerably greater in the smaller, more recently established institutions than in the colleges that had been operating for a number of years and already had library holdings of a respectable size. For the smaller colleges the mean was $47,854 and the median was $44,299. Comparable figures for the larger institutions were $29,206 and $24,220, respectively. In 1968, the representative smaller college had library hold- ' ings of approximately 13,000 volumes while the larger institution had approximately 29,000 volumes. A further indication of the insufficient financial support that community college libraries are afforded by their respective administrations is seen by the establish ment and comparison of ratios based upon Tables 23 and 24. According to Table 23, the libraries of the institutions included in this investigation had book collections with a j mean size of 29,706 volumes and a median size of 26,148 volumes. These same two-year colleges, as seen in Table j I 24, had full-time enrollments with a mean of 2,158 students! i and a median of 1,571 students. These figures would j j suggest in the strongest fashion possible that American j Table 23 — BOOK COLLECTIONS IN COMMUNITY COLLEGE LIBRARIES, 1969a Volumes Below 10 ,000-■20,000-■30, GOO-•40,000-50,000-60,000- 70,GOO- 80,GOO- Above Tot a] States 10,000 19,999 29,999 39,999 49,999 59,999 69,999 79, 999 89, 999 90,000 Alabama 1 4 5 Arizona 1 2 1 4 Calif. 1 9 6 12 18 6 3 2 3 1 61 Colorado 2 2 Florida 4 7 2 1 1 1 16 Georgia 3 1 1 2 7 Idaho 1 1 Illinois 2 1 1 4 Indiana 1 1 Iowa 1 5 1 7 Kansas 2 1 ' 3 Maryland 4 2 6 Mass. 2 1 3 Michigan 5 4 2 11 Minnesota 1 1 Miss. 4 4 Missouri 2 2 Montana 1 1 Nebraska 1 1 New Jersey 1 1 2 New York 1 3 5 3 1 13 No.Caroli. 2 3 4 9 No.Dakota 1 1 Ohio 1 1 Oklahoma 2 2 Oregon 4 2 6 Penn. 1 1 4 6 So.Carol. 1 1 Tenn. 1 1 1 Texas 2 7 5 5 1 1 1 22 Vi rm' m ‘ a A l e X I Oklahoma 2 2 Oregon 4 2 6 Penn. 1 1 4 6 So.Carol. 1 1 Tenn. 1 1 1 Texas 2 7 5 5 1 1 1 2 2 Virginia 4 1 5 Wash. 3 5 ■3 1 1 2 Wisconsin 1 1 1 3 Wyoming 1 1 Totals 9 69 56 40 30 9 5 3 3 2 226 aincludes only those respondents in the survey that were listed in the publication, U. S. Office of Education, Library Statistics of Colleges and Universities; Data for Individual Institutions, Fall, 1969 (Washington, D. C.: Government Printing Office, 1970). pp. 7-41. Table 24 — FULL-TIME STUDENT ENROLLMENT IN COMMUNITY COLLEGES, 1969a Enrollment Below 1,000- 2 ,000- 3,000- 4,000- 5,000- 6,000- 7,000- 8,000- Above Tota] States 1.OOO 1,999 2.999 3,999 4,999 5.999 6,999 7,999 8.999 9.000 Alabama 4 1 • 5 Arizona 2 1 1 4 Calif. 5 13 10 13 7 4 7 1 1 61 Colorado 1 1 2 Florida 6 4 2 2 1 1 16 Georgia 4 3 7 Idaho 1 1 Illinois 1 3 4 Indiana 1 1 Iowa 5 2 7 Kansas 1 2 3 Maryland 1 2 1 2 6 Mass. 2 1 3 Michigan 3 4 3 1 11 Minnesota 1 1 Miss. 3 1 4 Missouri 2 2 Montana 1 1 Nebraska 1 1 New Jersey 2 2 New York 1 5 2 1 2 1 1 13 AT/-* Pni-rkl O 1970). pp. 7-41. Table 24 — FULL-TIME STUDENT ENROLLMENT IN COMMUNITY COLLEGES, 1969a Enrollment Below States 1,000 1,000- 2,000- 3,000- 4,000- 5,000- 1.999 2.999 3.999 4,999 5.999 6,000- 7,000- 8,000- Above 6,999 7.999 8.999 9.000 Totals Alabama 4 1 5 Arizona 2 1 1 4 Calif. 5 13 10 13 7 4 7 1 1 61 Colorado 1 1 2 Florida 6 4 2 2 1 1 16 Georgia 4 3 7 Idaho 1 1 Illinois 1 3 4 Indiana 1 1 Iowa 5 2 7 Kansas 1 2 3 Maryland 1 2 1 2 6 Mass. 2 1 3 Michigan 3 4 3 1 11 Minnesota 1 1 Miss. 3 1 4 Missouri 2 2 Montana 1 1 Nebraska 1 1 New Jersey 2 2 New York 1 5 2 1 2 1 1 13 No.Carol. 8 1 9 No.Dakota 1 1 Ohio 1 1 Oklahoma 1 1 2 Oregon 3 1 1 1 6 Penn. 2 3 1 6 So.Carol. 1 1 Tenn. 2 2 Texas 8 8 4 2 22 Virginia 3 1 1 5 Wash. 4 4 3 1 12 Wisconsin 1 1 1 3 Wvomina 1 1 iotais /I "" 62 38 26 ll 6 9 1 1 i 226" 164 Table 24— (Con.)* aIncludes only those respondents in the survey which were listed in the publication, Junior College Director, 1971 (Washington, D. C.: American Association of Junior Colleges, 1971), pp. 14-83 165 166 public community colleges have failed to meet the minimum standards in the total size of their library holdings as recommended by the American Library Association in its Standards for Junior College Libraries: A two-year institution of up to 1,000 students (full-time equivalent) cannot discharge its mission without a carefully selected collection of at least 20,000 volumes, exclusive of duplicates and textbooks. . . . The book holdings should be increased as the enrollment grows. . . . Consultation with many junior college librarians indicates that for most junior libraries a convenient yardstick would be the follow ing: the bookstock should be enlarged by 5,000 volumes for every 500 students (full-time equivalent) beyond 1,000.23 A cursory examination of these tables and the ratio derived therefrom would seem to suggest that these institu tions were meeting these minimum suggested standards. How-; ever, that this assumption is not true can be seen from the following considerations: (1) Table 24 is based upon the full-time enrollments at the colleges being studied and does not include the much larger full-time equivalent totals that would result if the part-time students had been! included; (2) the total holdings would be considerably I smaller if the reported figures did not include the text books and duplicates; and (3) inasmuch as the majority of these colleges appeared to be multi-purpose institutions with broad curricular offerings, the actual library 23l,Standards for Junior College Libraries," op. cit.. p. 203. 167 holdings should be much greater than the suggested minimum figure. "Junior colleges with broad curriculum offerings will tend to have much larger collections; and institutions with a multiplicity of programs may need a minimum collec tion of two or three times the basic figure of 20,000 volumes. The book holdings should be increased as . . . 04. the complexity and depth of course offerings expand." Whereas only 22 colleges, or 10 percent, of the nation's community college libraries had book collections larger than 50,000 volumes, there were 15 California two- year academic institutions, or 25 percent, that had library holdings within this range. When full-time student enroll ments were considered, similar results were obtained. Only 18 colleges throughout the nation, or 8 percent, had full time enrollments of more than 5,000 students; however, 13 California community colleges, or 21 percent, had full-time enrollments within this range. For example, a California institution with a book collection of 126,134 volumes also had a total of 6,913 full-time students. Since on the basis of enrollment alone, the library holdings, according ; to a rigid application of the minimum standards, should j j have been only 80,000 volumes, it would appear that this j college's book collection reflected, to some extent, the j i depth of the institution's course offerings. However, this; ! • i i 24Ibid. I 168 rationale does not follow for all colleges; the institution with the nation’s largest full-time student enrollment, i.e., 14,440 students, had only 20,360 volumes. There was some evidence to suggest that this two-year college, which is located on the West Coast but not in California, had a full-time enrollment somewhat less than the cited figure. It is possible that this total may also include the part- time enrollment since this information was omitted from the directory listing. Another exception to the normal ratio was the non-California college with a library of 57,713 volumes although it had only 1,432 full-time students. Expenditures per Student. Table 25 gives the . library expenditures per each full-time equivalent student by American public community colleges for the years 1963- 64, 1967-68, and 1968-69. That financial support for more adequate library services increased for these years was indicated by the statistics. This favorable conclusion was reached even when allowance was made for an estimated inflation factor of 5 percent per year. Whether $50 per student per year is an adequate expenditure for community j college libraries is not known. Since Tables 9 and 25 j would suggest that the average community college budgeted approximately $50 per full-time equivalent student in j 1968-69 for its library, it can be assumed that an | inflation factor of only 4 percent per year would result in! 169 Table 25 LIBRARY EXPENDITURES PER FULL-TIME EQUIVALENT STUDENT— AMERICAN PUBLIC COMMUNITY COLLEGES INCLUDED IN SURVEY Amount Number of Institutions 1963-643 1967-68b 1968-69° $130 and above 2 4 7 120 - $129 1 1 4 110 - 119 - - 4 100 - 109 1 2 5 90 - 99 1 4 9 i 80 - 89 1 4 3 70 - 79 1 11 3 60 - 69 6 11 19 i 50 - 59 6 16 23 40 - 49 8 36 36 30 - 39 19 42 33 20 - 29 36 44 32 10 - 19 37 27 5 Under 10 3 — - Total 122 202 183 Mean $33.80 $43.84 $55.28 : Median $26.OC $37.00 $46.00 ; aU. S. Office of Education, Library Statistics of Colleqes and Universities, 1963-64; Institutional Data (Washington, D. C.; Government Printing Office, 1965), pp. 132-156. 1 bU. S. Office of Education, Library Statistics of j Colleoes and Universities; Data for Individual Institutions, 1 Fall, 1967 (Washinoton, D. C.: Government Printing Office, 1969), pp. 155--191. CU. S. Office of Education, I Library Statistics of Col lea es and Universities; Data for Individual Institutions,1 Fall. 1968 (Washington, D. C. : Government Printing Office, 1969), pp. 37-68. 170 a per student cost of approximately $64 in 1975-76. There appeared to be some evidence that library expenditures per full-time student were inversely propor tional to the number of students enrolled at the institu tion. There was a tendency for smaller colleges to spend more per student and for larger institutions to spend less per student for the library. Of the 7 institutions that used $130 and above for library expenditures per full-time equivalent student in 1968-69, all ranged in size from 615 students to 1,733 students; the mean was 1,113 students. During the same year only 5 colleges spent less than $20 for the library for each full-time equivalent student. These institutions ranged in size from 1,918 students to 6,185 students; the mean was 3,932 students. These explanations for this tendency have been suggested: (l) both small and large community colleges require similar basic book collections; additional books for the larger institution will usually be in the form of duplicates of heavily used library materials; and (2) by the time a college has a large student body, the library will have a respectable basic collection and some administrators believe that book purchases can be decreased. ! Other Criteria Relating to Expenditures. From the i preceding data only limited optimistic conclusions can be j i drawn. This judgment is especially true when one recalls j ithat during recent years a large portion of the library j 171 budget has been absorbed by an increase in operating expenses. There has been a continuous upward trend in library staff salaries in recent years. Table 26 gives the average starting salaries of librarians in their first position following graduation from an accredited library school. It will be noted that the average starting salary was only $4,665 in 1957/59; however, in 1965 it was $6,468. This represented an increase of almost 39 percent in 7 years. By 1970 the beginning average starting salary was $8,611. In the 5 years since 1965, there had been an increase of over 33 percent. As may be seen from the cost index of books (Table 27) and the cost index of periodicals (Table 28), .for the years from 1957/59 to 1970 there was an increase'-; in the cost of library materials. The average price for books was $5.29 in 1957/59; in 1965 it was $7.65; and in 1970 it was $11.66. These prices represented an increase of almost 45 percent between 1957/59 and 1965, and an increase of over 52 percent between 1965 and 1970. Obviously, the rate of increase has been much greater during the past five years. In 1957/59 the average price for periodicals was $4.92; in 1965 it was $6.95; and in 1970 it was $10.41. Therefore, the annual cost of periodicals increased more than 41 percent between the years 1957/59 and 1965. From 1965 to 1970 the increase was almost 50 percent. 172 Table 26 AVERAGE SALARY INDEX FOR STARTING LIBRARY POSITIONS 1957/59-1970^,b,c Year 1957/59 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 Index 100 139 145 156 164 175 185 Average Salary $4.665 6,468 6.765 7,305 7.660 8,181 8.611 aBowker Annual of Library and Book Trade Information (New York: R. R. Bowker Co., 1969), p. 162. ^Carlyle J. Frarey, "Placement & Salaries: The 1969 Plateau," Library Journal, XCV (June 1, 1970), 2103. cCarlyle J. Frarey and Mary R. Donley, "Placements & Salaries, 1970: The Year That Was Not What It Seemed," Library Journal. XCVI (June 1, 1971), 1940. Table 27 COST INDEX OF HARDCOVER BOOKS 1957/59-1970a>b Year 1957/59 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 Index 100 144.5 150.0 151.0 160.1 177.1 220.4 Average Price $5.29 7.65 7.94 7.99 8.47 9.37 11.66 a"1967 in Review: Statistics, News, Trends," Publishers1 Weekly. CXCVII (February 9, 1970), 49. k " S o m e statistics of 1969 and 1970," Publishers' Weekly. CXCIX (February 8, 1971), 51. Table 28 COST INDEX OF PERIODICALS 1957/59-1970a,b Year 1957/59 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 Index 100 141.3 151.2 163.0 175.8 189.3 211.6 Average Price $ 4.92 6.95 7.44 8.02 8.65 9.31 10.41 aBowker Annual of Library and Book Trade Information (New York: R. R. Bowker Co., 1969), pp. 47; 52. b|lPrice Indexes for 1971," Library Journal, XCVI (July, 1971), 2271-72. During these same years the cost of cataloging and processing a volume into the book collection of a college library continued to increase. A major reason for these spiraling costs has been the continual rise in the salaries of library personnel. In his classic use of the cost 25 account technique in libraries, Fremont Rider, University Librarian, Wesleyan University, affirmed that in 1936 the cost of placing a book on the shelves of his library was $1.37. In 1961, Don Wynar,^^ Assistant Professor, Graduate School of Librarianship, University of Denver, used ^^Fremont Rider, "Library Cost Accounting," Library Quarterly. VI (October, 1936), 331-381. ozr Don Wynar, "Cost Analysis in a Technical Services Division," Library Resources & Technical Services. VII (Fall, 1963), 312-326. 174 carefully planned and administered time and cost studies of the steps involved in acquiring and processing a book and determined that it cost $4.33 to add the average non fiction title to his library. Prior to analyzing the acquisitions and cataloging costs of the Colorado Academic Libraries Book Processing Center Project, it was reported that it was costing the 9 member libraries an average of $4.50 to process their own books in 1968. These studies are too few to determine authoritatively the actual cost of adding a book to an academic library collection. Also, because of the nature of the book acquisitions in a two- year college, there is the possibility that the cost may be somewhat less. However, these figures are suggestive of the increase in the cost of processing a book into a library collection. With the increased number of students who attend community colleges, the expanding volume of publications throughout the nation and the world, and the never-ending effect of inflation upon salaries and the cost of library materials, there will be an urgent and continual need for larger library budgets. 27 Joan M. Maier, "Analyzing Acquisitions and j Cataloging Costs," Library Resources & Technical Services. I XIII (Winter, 1969), 128. j 175; The Nation's Awareness of Library Needs. That individual community colleges must re-examine the level of financial support to their respective libraries has been strongly suggested by the statistics. Also, a greater and more effective effort must be exerted by the library directors who would improve the financial climate in their libraries. During recent years there have been some indications that public administrators, government leaders, and educators have become more aware of the urgent need for improved library facilities and services. The Higher Education Facilities Act (1963) and the Higher Education Act (1965) have been outstanding national testimonies to this effect. The former act authorized a program of federal grants and loans for the construction or improve ment of higher education academic facilities. For the years 1969-71, $2,808 million was appropriated for under graduate academic facilities. Title II of the Higher Education Act of 1965 authorized basic grants for college library books and materials, special purpose grants for colleges with special needs, training grants to increase the supply of college librarians and to develop new tech niques , and grants for the cataloging services of the ; Library of Congress. The original act authorized $50 mil- i lion a year for library materials with a 1968 extension, l which authorized $75 million for Title II in 1970 and $90 million for fiscal 1971. However, the full amounts j 176 authorized were not appropriated. The $24.5 million appropriated for fiscal 1967 was more than triple the 1966 amount. During the years 1968 and 1969 the appropriation was stabilized at $25 million annually. However, it fell to $9.9 million in .1970. Seemingly, the earlier awareness of the need for the improvement of library services has ended. Span of Control of the Head Librarian Budget Responsibility. In 224 community colleges, or 89 percent of those reporting, the head librarian had complete responsibility for the preparation of the library budget. As would be expected, the individual library director consulted a number of persons and groups on the campus in order to secure guidance in the development and completion of the budget request. The nature, extent, and i quality of these consultations varied from campus to campus and from person to person. According to Table 29, at those institutions in which the counsel of only one person or group was sought, 41 librarians, or 45 percent contacted ! the president, the academic vice-president, or the academicj dean; the percentages were 13, 8 , and 24, respectively. j i However, at 27 colleges, or 29 percent, other library staff members, usually professional but sometimes clerical, were the only persons consulted. When all responses were ; i considered, the library department heads were involved in j Table 29— PREPARATION OF THE LIBRARY’S ANNAUL BUDGET— PERSONS OR GROUPS CONSULTED BY THE HEAD LIBRARIAN Person or Group Single Response Multiple Responses (N = 136) Total (N Responses = 229) No. % No. % No. % President 12 13 56 41.2 68 29.7 Academic Vice-President 7 8 22 16.2 29 12.7 Academic Dean 22 24 76 55.9 98 42.8 Board of Trustees — — ■ 2 1.5 2 .8 Depart, and/or Division Chairmen 5 5 59 43.4 64 28.0 Faculty - - 42 30.9 42 18.3 Library department heads 27 29 92 67.6 119 52.0 Student Council — — 5 3.7 5 2.2 Other: Business manager 20 (6) 21 (6.5) 26 19.1 32 14.0 Library staff (4) (4.5) 8 5.9 12 5.2 Library committee (1) (1.0) 5 3.7 6 2.6 Head of Learn. Resource Center (3) (3.0) 1 .7 4 1.7 Head of Audio-Visual Services (1) (i.o) 2 1.5 3 1.3 Assistant Dean — — 1 .7 1 .4 Assistant Director, Instructional Services 1 .7 1 .4 Assistant Director, Student Services and Operations (1) (i.o) 1 .4 Budget Committee (1) (1.0) 1 .7 2 .9 None (3) (3.0) — — 3 1.3 Total 93 100 177 178 the budget development process only slightly more than the academic deans; the percentages were 52 and 42.8, respectively. At only 3 institutions did the head librarians state that they prepared the library budgets without the aid or consultation of anyone else. Library budget preparation was a cooperative process at 136 commun ity colleges, or 59 percent; from 2 to 7 individuals or groups were contacted for assistance. The library commit tee, which will be discussed in detail in Chapter VIII, was 28 consulted by only 34 head librarians, or 17.5 percent, as may be seen from Table 58. Specific conclusions were difficult to reach concerning the real value of any particular type of consul tation. Although no attempt was made to.correlate the type of consultation that took place with the percentage of the total institutional budget that the library received, one might infer that consultation with the president, vice- president, or academic dean was effective. The extent of the librarian's over-all control of the library budget was impressive regardless of the type of consultation. i i Participation in Library Matters j by the Administration j 28 This figure differs from the 2.6 percent in Table 29 since the latter figure was secured from an open- |ended section of the questionnaire. 179 Table 30 CONSULTATION OF THE HEAD LIBRARIAN BY THE ADMINISTRATION PRIOR TO DECISION MAKING Frequency No. Percentage Always 120 47.6 Usually 105 41.7 Sometimes 20 7.9 Seldom 6 2.4 Never 1 .4 Total 252 100.0 Such groups and individuals as the boards of trustees, chief administrative officers (the usual title is president), business managers, and other administrative officers of community colleges often assumed important roles in library affairs. However, they usually did not make important decisions which affected the operation or development of the library without consulting the head librarian. As is evident from Table 30, the administration either always (47.6 percent) or usually (41.7 percent) sought the advice of the director of the library before it initiated action in the formulation or implementation of j library policies or practices. These favorable replies arej ! particularly significant when one remembers that "a typical weakness of administrators is to make important decisions of policy without full discussion with their faculties. 29ajlq0 Donmver Henderson. Policies and Practices ini : Hiqher Education (New York: Harper’ "& BfdS'.', ryUU)', p. 23U~. j 180 An important observation is the realization that at 223 colleges, or slightly more than 87 percent, it was the opinion of the head librarian that the college administra tion had taken meaningful positions that had resulted in significant advances in library services, facilities, or finances during the past 5 years. These areas are indicated on Table 31. At 187 colleges, or 81 percent, the library had either a new or a remodeled building that expanded the facilities to handle the increased enroll ments. Four librarians reported that the new or modified buildings were the only significant advances that had been made by the college administrations during these years. An important corollary was the almost identical number of libraries which had secured additional library staff members during the past 5 years; there were 186 institu tions, or 80.5 percent. Microfilm readers and/or reader- printers and photocopying machines were used by a signifi cant number of libraries; the percentages were 71 and 70.1, respectively. Over one-half of the librarians reported that their book budgets had been increased beyond those which would have resulted from inflation. A much smaller j number of libraries were computerizing library routines or were using dial-access systems; the total number of libraries were 44 (19 percent) and 32 (13.9 percent), respectively. 181 Table 31 SIGNIFICANT LIBRARY ADVANCES 1965-1970 (N a 231) Area of Advance Number Percentaqe New library building/remodeled building and/or increased facilities 187 81.0 Increased book budget beyond inflation-caused increase 134 58.0 Additional library staff 186 80.5 Photocopying machine(s) 162 70.1 Microfilm reader(s), reader/printer(s) 164 71.0 Automation by means of data processing equipment 44 19.0 Dial-access system 32 13.9 Other s Administrative reorganization A-V materials and equipment 3 9 1.3 3.9 Catalog card production, using MT/ST typing and telephone recording centers, IBM magnetic tape, Selectric typewriters 1 .4 Checkpoint Circulation System 1 .4 Determine library needs 1 .4 General support of library policies 2 .9 Pre-processing service 1 .4 Preparation of federal projects 2 .9 Teletype interlibrary loan network 1 .4 Twelve month contracts for librarians 1 .4 Video tape system 1 .4 182 Participation in Library Matters by the Faculty As has already been mentioned in Chapter V and as will be expanded upon further in Chapter VIII, faculty members usually had ample opportunities to participate in library matters through faculty library committees. Also, interested faculty members could participate as fully as they desired in library matters in other ways. Sometimes their counsel was sought by the librarian concerning the budgetary provisions of the library. He would seek their guidance either in personal conferences or with a verbal or written invitation for participation to the entire faculty. Faculty members were usually afforded the opportunity to participate in the development of the book collection by the selection of library materials pertinent to the courses; that they taught. They could participate in collection development in different ways: (l) recommend to the library specific titles within their subject proficiency for purchase; (2) evaluate titles for possible purchase by j reading book reviews that the library brought to the f I attention of the faculty; (3) read and evaluate books j ' j received on approval plans; and (4) meet with a book selec-j tion committee. Faculty members have had the opportunity ! to keep the library current concerning their needs by direct communication, through the library committee, or ithrough their appointed library representatives._______ j 183 Library Representatives. In the smaller community colleges the department chairmen usually became the library representatives, i.e., they generally were the persons who submitted book orders to the library for their specific departments. However, in the larger institutions the library representatives quite often were faculty members other than the department chairmen. Sometimes they were selected or appointed by their specific academic departments; in other cases they might be library committee members; and, finally, the academic dean or some other administrator made the appointments on some campuses. Generally, it was the library representative who approved for the academic department the requisitions for books and other library materials. The recommendation is herewith made that the head librarian or a designated member of the library staff meet with these representatives on a formal basis at least two or three times per year. However, he will confer with some of them informally either daily or weekly if there is good liaison between the library and the faculty. I There are times when interested faculty members will be asked to weed the shelves in their subject i specialities, examine and evaluate gift collections, or i | supply priority lists within their disciplines for retro spective book purchasing and the securing of back runs of periodicals. I 184 Such factors as available finances, meaningful communication between the library director and faculty members, and the extent of active cooperation will influ ence the implementation of recommendations, suggestions, and criticisms. Communication with Faculty and Administration by the Head Librarian In various ways the head librarians of public community colleges kept their respective administrators and faculty members informed and up-to-date on the organi zation, services, and functions of their libraries. One of the most effective, commonly-used means was by direct communication with some or all of these persons, either individually or collectively. Most library directors attempted to open and maintain channels of communication by means of diverse types of publications. Most frequently the respondents mentioned such items as annual reports, library handbooks, lists of new books, and memorandums to campus colleagues. Sometimes the annual reports were semi-; private, formal statements to the college president. At | i other times they were widely-distributed reports, either | i as separate documents or as integral parts of the i I institution's annual report. Representative of the latter j were the voluminous annual reports of both campuses of the Macomb County (Michigan) Community College. i Summary This chapter has examined the administrative control of the American public community colleges and has determined that the majority of them are operated by independent college districts. A considerable degree of authority and responsibility has been granted to the head librarian since the library stands relatively high in the hierarchy of community college government. At a signifi cantly high percentage of the institutions the director of the library was administratively responsible to the academic dean or another administrator who filled a similar role. Audio-visual services were administered by the library on most of the college campuses. Although the majority of head librarians had reasonably sophisticated conceptions of the role of the community college library, they recognized that many of the libraries had not been entirely successful in the fulfill ment of this role. Minimum standards as suggested by the American Library Association for junior college libraries had been met by many of the institutions; yet less than adequate financial support had been provided for many of them. With the continual increase in the cost of library operations, budgets will have to be raised proportionately I just to remain even because of inflation. In spite of the attempts on the part of the head 186 librarians to inform administrators and faculty members of the policies, services, and future plans of the library, there were still inadequacies in the channels of communica tion. There was an equally serious attempt on the part of the administration to keep the director of the library and faculty members up-to-date on college projects and plans. CHAPTER VII THE HEAD LIBRARIAN OF THE AMERICAN PUBLIC COMMUNITY COLLEGE Introduction The library is of considerable importance in principle, if not in fact, in the structure of public com munity college administration and government. However, the actual direction taken on a campus by a community college library is determined not only by strong administrative interest and support but by the caliber of the head librarian. Ellsworth Mason, Director of Libraries at Hofstra University, has made a humorous statement with con siderable truth as he expands upon the qualifications to be: expected of the ideal head librarian: . . . . He must be a psychiatrist to ease the traumas common in library staffs, a diplomat of the first water with the faculty, whom he must cultivate socially and intellectually, a fund-raiser, and collection raiser, a ; scientific management expert, and a technologist. . . . ' He must always have a sensitive finger on the heart-beat of the university, to respond to its chills and fevers with hot or cold library services. In addition, he must be a master convention-goer. . . . So far, we are asking for the Father, the Son, the Holy Ghost and three choirs of angels. . . . 187 188 On the side, of course, he is expected to be loving to his wife, an ideal father to his children, a model citizen participating in his community, a steady churchgoer, and as a logical outcome of all the fore going, to maintain a healthy, well-balanced, creative outlook on life. . . This chapter considers the legal basis of the head librarian's position; his selection and appointment; his organizational responsibility; his administrative status, academic rank, and position title; and his participation in campus affairs. Legal Basis of Position Table 32 indicates that the position of the head librarian in the administrative organization of the community college is based, not upon any clear-cut legal concept, but upon various other considerations, e.g., local: policy or practice or a specific law or ordinance. The practices most frequently mentioned by the correspondents were these: (l) the established policy of the institu tion’s board of trustees, and (2) an administrative decree by the college administration. Almost identical totals were reported: 61 colleges, or 24.8 percent, mentioned the former basis of operation; whereas 60 institutions, or 24.4 i percent, indicated the latter. In only 8 colleges, or 3.2 1 Ellsworth Mason, "Back to the Cave; or, Some j Buildings I Have Known," Library Journal. XCIV (December 1,! 1969), 4355-4356. j 189 Table 32 BASIS OF THE POSITION OF THE HEAD LIBRARIAN Basis Number Percentage Administrative fiat 60 24.4 City ordinance 1 .4 College of Trustees' policy 61 24.8 County ordinance ---- Historical customs 11 4.5 Local practice 28 11.4 State law 6 2.4 Statute 1 .4 Other: Board of Higher Education by-laws (1) (.4) Department of Community Colleges (1) (.4) Mutual decision (1) (.4) Recommendation of faculty senate (1) (•4) Request of regional accrediting association (1) (.4) Union-board contract (1) (.4) Combination of two or more of above bases 72 29.3 Total 246 100.0 1 9 0 percent, was the position of the head librarian based on either a state law or a city ordinance. There were, how ever, an additional 16 responses, or 6.5 percent of the overall total, which combined a law or statute with other specific practices. The answers of 160 institutions, or 65 percent, demonstrated most vividly the close relation ships that existed between the community colleges and the geographical areas they served. In addition to the 121 2 responses mentioned previously, 28 institutions, or 11.4 percent, suggested local practice as the justification for the position of the head librarian; and 11 colleges, or 4.5 percent, mentioned historical customs. More than one ground for the accepted practice of having a head librarian was reported by 72 institutions, or 29.3 percent of the overall total. These replies would suggest that American public community colleges base the position of their head librarians upon diverse reasons although the majority of responses do custer around a few practices. Selection and Appointment I Selection. Although many persons or groups of j persons may be involved in the selection of the head librarian, the administrative officers of the community j colleges usually appear to be the most active. As seen in ■ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - j | ^ S u p r a , p . 1 9 0 . j Table 33, the chief administrative officer (48 colleges), the academic vice-president (13 colleges), or the academic dean (21 colleges) was the sole person involved in the selective process at 62 institutions, or 75 percent of those colleges that left the decision wholly in the hands of one person or group. However, the present tendency at many institutions is to make the selective decision a cooperative process. More than one person or group was involved in the task at 137 institutions. Of these, 60, or almost 44 percent, involved two or more of the administra tive officers of the college in the decision. When all responses were tallied, it was found that the president, the academic vice-president, and the academic dean were deeply involved in the process; the figures were 127 (92.7 percent), 31 (22.6 percent), and 89 (65 percent), respectively. It is noted with particular interest that only 4 institutions, or 3.7 percent, designated the college's board of trustees as the sole selective body. However, when multiple persons or groups were used in the selective process, 47 colleges, or 34.3 percent, included i i the board of trustees. In only 10 colleges, or 9.3 percent,j i was a special selection committee solely responsible for i ■ ' | choosing the head librarian. When multiple responses were given, however, an additional 13 institutions included the committee as an aid in the selective process. Therefore, it was apparent that only 23 colleges, or 9.4 percent, made Table 33 — SELECTION OF THE HEAD LIBRARIAN Selecting Person or Group Single Response Multiple (N = Responses 137) Total (N Responses = 245) No. % No. % No. % Board of Trustees 4 3.7 47. 34.3 51 20.8 President 48 44.5 127 92.7 175 71.4 Academic Vice-President 13 12.0 31 22.6 44 18.0 Academic Dean 21 19.5 89 65.0 110 44.9 Assistant Dean 1 .9 4 2.9 5 2.0 Academic Senate — --------- 2 1.5 2 .8 Faculty — --------- 6 4.4 6 2.4 Special selection committee 10 9.3 13 9.5 23 9.4 Other: 11 10.1 20 14.6 31 12.6 Administrative Council (1) (.9) — — — — — (1) (.4) Administrative Vice-President — ------ — (1) (.7) (1) (.4) Board of Regents — --------- (1) (.7) (1) (.4) Chancellor — --------- (2) (1.5) (2) (.8) Director of Extension Program Director of Learning (1) (.9) — — — (1) (.4) Resources Center (3) (2 .8) (7) (5.1) (10) (4.1) Election (3) (2 .8) ------ --------- (3) (1.2) Library committee — — ------ (1) ( .7) (1) (.4) Library professional staff President and vote of (1) (.9) (8) (5.8) (9) (3.7) professional librarians Tenured librarians and (1) (.9) ——— (1) (.4) Academic Dean (1) (.9) — — (1) (.4) Total 108 100.0 192 193 even a token use of the search committee for a new head librarian. Also noted was the fact that on most campuses academic senates and college faculties had almost no roles. In no institution was either body the sole arbiter in the choice, and the response was but slight when multiple tallies were included, i.e., academic senates - 2 and college faculties - 6 . It is evident, therefore, that the administrative officers of American public community colleges have been assigned the dominant role in the selection of head librarians; whereas academic senates, college faculties, and selection committees are given minimal responsibility in this important task. There appeared to be no significant difference in those libra ries that had an essentially collegial rather than hier- archial internal organization. Although only 23 institutions availed themselves of the services of special search committees in the selection of new library directors, Table 34 demonstrates clearly the interesting and valuable variety in the appointment or election of these committees. An adminis- i trative officer of the college appointed the committee in j i 1 9 institutions, or 39 percent of the cases in which the j I committee had the sole responsibility for the choice. In an additional 5 colleges, or 22 percent, the administra tion involved the faculty in the creation of the committee. i This duty was undertaken on some campuses by the academic 194 Table 34 APPOINTMENT OF THE HEAD LIBRARIAN SEARCH COMMITTEE Appointing body Number Percentage Board of Trustees - - President 6 26 Academic Vice-President 2 9 Academic Dean 1 4 Assistant Dean - - Academic Senate 4 18 Faculty 3 13 Other: Library department 2 9 President and Academic Senate 2 9 President and faculty 1 4 President, Academic Senate and faculty 1 4 Administration (by President) and faculty (by Faculty Council) 1 4 Total 23 100 195 senates, college faculties, and professional members of the library staff with percentages of 18, 13, and 9, respectively. The composition of the special selection committee is delineated in Table 35. With the exception of student representation (only 5 colleges had student members), there was a balanced, campus=wide membership on the committee: administrators - 15, faculty members - 18, and librarians - 13. Single institutions had representation from the board of trustees and the library clerical staff. The size of the committee, as given by the 10 reporting libraries, varied from 4 to 12 members, with an arithmetic mean of 6.7 members and a median of 6 members. The span of committee membership varied from a narrow 2-category representation to a somewhat broad 5-category representa tion. This limited sample suggests that a composite, albeit somewhat artificial, committee membership would be: administrators - 1.7, faculty members - 3.8, board of trustees -.4, librarians other than the head librarian - .5, and students - .5. i Appointment. In those few institutions that used selection committees in their searches for new head j | librarians, formal appointments were made by the board of trustees or by the board in cooperation with the president in the majority of cases. According to Table 36, the board was the appointing body in 48 percent of the j 196 Table 35 COMPOSITION OF THE SPECIAL SELECTION COMMITTEE Tvoe of Membership Number (N = 23) Percentaqe Administrators 15 65 Board of Trustees' members 1 4 Faculty members 18 76 Librarians other than head librarian 13 57 Library clerical staff, including library clerks 1 4 Students 5 22 Table 36 APPOINTMENT OF THE HEAD LIBRARIAN Appointing Body or Person Number Percentage Board of Trustees 11 48 President 7 31 Academic Vice-President — Academic Dean 1 4 Assistant Dean — — Board of Trustees and President 4 17 Total 23 100 197 d e c i s i o n s . An additional 17 percent of the appointments were made as cooperative judgments by the board and the president However, in 31 percent of the institutions the appointnu ..ts were made by the president alone. The academic dean made the appointments in 4 percent of the colleges. It is probable that in actual practice the appointing body sought recommendations from various persons and/or groups. Organizational Responsibility The relationship of the college president and his librarian has been discussed most thoroughly by several writers. Randall and Goodrich stated: . . . the ideal organization of the college hierarchy seems to be this: the librarian, who reports directly I to the president, who, in turn, reports to the board, such an arrangement makes the librarian one of the administrative officers of the college. . . . The control of the library is thus vested in the librarian who serves directly under the president without any intervening authority.3 A similar administrative relationship was recom mended by Wilson and Tauber^ who suggested a cooperative i arrangement. The president delegates the responsibility | 3 William Madison Randall and Francis Goodrich, Principles of College Library Administration. Second Edition (Chicago: American Library Association and 1 University of Chicago Press, 1941), pp. 27-28. ^Louis Round Wilson and Maurice Falcolm Tauber, The University Library. Second Edition (New York: ! Columbia University Press, 1956), p. 40. 198 of the administration of the library to a competent librarian; meanwhile, however, the president keeps the librarian informed of the administrative and educational plans of the college. Likewise, the librarian has the responsibility of keeping the president informed of staff and materials needs of the library. During the past several decades there has been a trend in four-year colleges and universities toward having the head librarian report to the academic dean rather than to the president. As observed by Lyle, the practice of having the librarian directly responsible to the president of the institution has been modified: .... In an increasing number of colleges and uni versities today, the librarian is made responsible to the president through an academic vice-president or dean. This change . . . is in line with the span of control principle that there should be only a small number of major administrative officers reporting directly to the president. . . . It placed the libra rian at a disadvantage in presenting the needs of a developing library program. . . .5 The verification of this trend is seen in Table 37,: which examines the organizational relationship of the head ; librarians of community colleges. On 138 campuses, or 54.3 percent, the director of the library was organization-1 | ally responsible to the academic dean. Responsibility to | | other than the chief administrative officer of the C •^Guy Redvers Lyle, The Administration of the | College Library. Third Edition (New York: H. W. Wilson Co., 1961), p. 50. 199 Table 37 ORGANIZATIONAL RELATIONSHIP OF THE HEAD LIBRARIAN Person Number Percentage Board of Trustees ---- President 36 14.2 Academic Vice-President 34 13.4 Academic Dean 138 54.3 Assistant Dean 7 2.7 Director of Learning Resources 20 7.9 Other: 7 2.7 Administrative Assistant (1) Associate Superintendent (1) Director of College Services (1) Director of Extension Program (1) Divisional Chairman (1) President or Academic Vice-President (1) Vice-President - Fiscal (1) Combination of two of above persons 12 4.8 Total 254 100.0 colleges occurred at an additional 61 institutions, or 24 percent: academic vice-president - 34 responses, assistant dean - 7 responses, and director of learning resources - 20.responses. The head librarian reported directly to the college president at only 36 colleges, or 14.2 percent of the total. When these data were compared with the results of Wheeler’s study of 1964, a marked difference was evident. Wheeler found that 58.2 percent of the community college librarians described themselves as responsible to their respective college presidents; whereas only 27.1 percent reported that their organizational responsibility was to their deans. This change has undoubtedly become a necessity with the increased enrollment in the community colleges. Although there has been a reversal, it was probably not as dramatic as these statistics might suggest. To some extent the differences may have resulted from the structure of the questionnaire. Wheeler's question, "Do you as library director report to the college president?" encouraged positive responses by those librarians who reported to both the president and ^Helen Rippier Wheeler, "The Community College Library; An Appraisal of Current Practice" (unpublished Ed.D. project, Columbia University, Teachers College, 1964), p. 185. 7Ibid., p. 156. the dean. The present study attempted to identify those institutions in which the head librarians reported to multiple administrative officers. It was also noted that the present sample was larger - 242 vs. 103 colleges. This continuing trend away from the president to the academic dean may be due in part to the fact that the community colleges included in this investigation were O larger than those in Wheeler's study. Whereas Wheeler reported that 58 of of 103 institutions had enrollments of over 1,000 students, the present study showed that 189 of 257 colleges had more than 1,000 students. It is probable that larger institutions will tend to delegate administra tive responsibilities to other persons, thereby reducing the number who report directly to the president. Of particular interest was the considerable number of colleges (20) in which the head librarian was responsi ble to the director of learning resources, who was some times not professionally trained in librarianship. Responsibility for Professional Personnel. It has already been seen from Table 37 that the head librarian was administratively responsible to the academic dean on a significant number of community college campuses. There fore, it is not surprising to note from Table 38 that the head librarian was administratively responsible to the 8Ibid., p. 219. 202 Table 38 ORGANIZATIONAL RESPONSIBILITY OF THE HEAD LIBRARIAN WITH REFERENCE TO LIBRARY PROFESSIONAL PERSONNEL Person Number Percentage President 39 15.4 Academic Vice-President 43 17.0 Academic Dean 136 53.5 Assistant Dean 6 2.3 Personnel Director -- --- Director of Learning Resources 19 7.5 Other: 6 2.3 Administrative Assistant (1) Associate Superintendent (1) Director of College Services (1) Director of Extension Program (1) Divisional Chairman (1) Vice-President - Fiscal (1) Combination of two or more of above persons 5 2.0 Total 254 100.0 203 dean for the supervision of library professional person nel. The percentages for the two tables were 54.3 and 53.5, respectively. Another comparison between the two tables demonstrated similarities for the other administra tive officers of the institutions being examined. For example, Table 37 shows that 14.2 percent of the head librarians were organizationally responsible to the presi dent; and, according to Table 38, 15.4 percent are admin istratively accountable to the president for the profes sional employees in the library. Responsibility for Clerical Personnel. The general organizational campus relationship of the director of the library appeared to have but little positive correlation with his responsibility for the clerical employees in the library. Table 39 suggests that on the majority of com munity college campuses the head librarian had this super visory responsibility for these employees under either the business manager (27 percent) or the academic dean (24.2 percent). Small colleges sometimes left this responsibil ity with the president; whereas large colleges and multi college districts often employed personnel managers. Seventy-five percent of the institutions in which the head :librarians were organizationally responsible to the presi dent for clerical personnel had full-time enrollments of less than 2,500. On the other hand, 53 percent of those | ■ I colleges that employed personnel managers to whom the head I 204 Table 39 ORGANIZATIONAL RESPONSIBILITY OF THE HEAD LIBRARIAN WITH REFERENCE TO LIBRARY CLERICAL PERSONNEL Person Number Percentage President 28 11.1 Academic Vice-President 20 7.9 Academic Dean 61 24.2 Assistant Dean 2 .8 Personnel Manager 17 6.7 Business Manager 68 27.0 Director of Learning Resources 18 7.1 Other: 19 7.6 Administrative Assistant Assistant Director, (3) Institutional Services Assistant Director, Student (1) Services and Operations (1) Assistant Superintendent (1) Associate Dean for Administration (1) Dean of Student Personnela Director of Civil Service (2 ) Personnel (2 ) Director of College Services (1) Director of Educational Services (1) Director of Extension Program Director of Non-Academic (1) Personnel (1) Divisional Chairman (1) Librarian only (1) Provost (1) Registrar (1) Combination of two of above persons 19 7.6 Total 252 100.0 aAlternate title: Head of Student Personnel Services. 205 jlibrarians reported concerning these employees had full time enrollments of more than 2,500. Generally, community j colleges with learning resource centers had the librarian j 1 i administratively responsible to the director of the center.j | : Administrative Status i I i Although the library is traditionally one of the most costly adjuncts of a modern college, the role of the j head librarian and his administrative relationship with I the institution were often not clearly defined. ! I ! Of the institutions that submitted college ! i i ! g 1 jcatalogs for examination, only 26, or 31 percent, listed ! ; | |the director of the library with the other administrative | : officers of the college. The remaining 58, or 69 percent, ! listed him either with the faculty or with the library unit of the college. j Table 40 examines the administrative status of the head librarian and validates the accuracy of the information derived from the college catalogs. The library director was defined as an administrative officer at 80 institutions, or ; I ! 31.6 percent. At an additional 120 colleges, or 47.4 per cent, he had a combination of administrative and faculty j responsibilities. However, at 33 institutions, or 13 t ^Slightly less than one-third of the respondents Isent catalogs. 206 Table 40 ADMINISTRATIVE STATUS OF THE HEAD LIBRARIAN Status Number Percentage Administrative Officer of the College 80 31.6 Faculty Member Without Administrative Responsibility 33 13.0 Combination of Administrative and Faculty Duties 120 47.4 Has Neither Administrative Nor Faculty Status 4 1.6 Other: Administrative Staff (Not sin Officer of the College) 5 2.0 Ancillary Staff 1 .4 Department or Division Chairman 9 3.6 Special Services Counsellor 1 .4 Total 253 100.0 percent of the total, he was considered to be a faculty member without any administrative responsibilities. At 4 colleges, or 1.6 percent, the head librarian had neither ' administrative nor faculty status. ! i In summary, head librarians of American public com-j I munity colleges generally had both administrative and j | faculty responsibilities. However, in some institutions i they had one or the other of these assignments exclusively. 207 Faculty Rank An almost universal tradition is for universities and senior colleges to grant faculty rank to the members of their faculties. Although faculty ranks are sometimes given to librarians, the practice is far from common. Often academic rank is given only to the head librarian; however, key members of the library staff are sometimes included. Librarians with faculty rank sometimes do not receive the same benefits as the faculty, e.g., salary, vacations, and sabbatical leaves. The practice of grant ing faculty ranks to librarians is not common on community college campuses. According to Table 41, which examines the faculty rank generally held by the head librarian, 154 colleges, or 62 percent, did not rank their faculty members. At these institutions the title instructor or lecturer was usually designated for all faculty members. Of the 95 institutions with academic rank, the head librarians held faculty titles in these proportions: professor - 31 (12 percent), associate professor - 28 (11 percent), assistant professor - 19 (8 percent), and instructor - 17 (7 percent). Several respondents stated that the actual rank could vary on the basis of status and seniority; this was probably true at the majority of the colleges. 208 Table 41 FACULTY RANK OF THE HEAD LIBRARIAN Rank Number Percentage Professor 31 12 Associate Professor 28 11 Assistant Professor 19 8 Instructor 17 7 No actual rank 154 62 Total 249 100 In her survey, Characteristics of Professional Personnel in College and University Libraries. Anita R. 10 Schiller, Research Associate, Library Research Center, University of Illinois, found that 51.2 percent of all academic librarians held faculty rank. This percentage is substantially higher than the present investigation identified since the majority of community colleges had no faculty ranks for any of their personnel. Anita R. Schiller, Characteristics of Profes- |sional Personnel in College and University Libraries |(Springfield: Illinois State Library, 1969), p. 63. Faculty Status— Benefits and Privileges 209 Although somewhat less than one-half of the head librarians reported that they had faculty rank (Table 41 gives 38 percent while Table 42 indicates 41.8 percent), a substantial majority were accorded faculty status and many of its accompanying benefits and privileges, e.g., sabbatical leave, tenure, and faculty retirement benefits. Whereas Wheeler-*--*- reported that 83.4 percent of the library directors had faculty status, the present investigation indicated that the figure would have been somewhat higher (97.2 percent) if retirement benefits had been used to determine whether a person had faculty status. The response of 249 community colleges concerning the privi leges of faculty status that have been accorded to their head librarians have been summarized in Table 42. Retire ment benefits, identical to those for members of the teaching faculty, were granted to the head librarians of 242 colleges, or 97.2 percent of the respondents. Although a considerable majority of the library directors were given released time (96.4 percent) and travel allowances ■(96.6 percent) for their attendance at professional meetings, a lesser majority (75.5 percent) received expense: accounts while at the meetings. A majority of the head j librarians attended faculty meetings and held faculty j committee assignments, with percentages of 95.2 and 90.4, i llWheeler, op. cit., p. 89. j 210 Table 42 BENEFITS OF FACULTY STATUS APPLICABLE TO THE HEAD LIBRARIAN (N = 249) Benefit Number Percentage Faculty rank 104 41.8 On faculty salary schedule 177 71.1 Eligible for sabbatical leave 173 69.5 On faculty committees 225 90.4 Attends faculty meetings 237 95.2 Eligible for Academic Senate 149 59.9 Released time for attending professional meetings 240 96.4 Travel allowance for attending professional meetings 238 95.6 Expense account for attending professional meetings 188 75.5 Tenure 215 86.3 Faculty retirement benefits 242 97.2 Other (group insurance, same calendar year, dental and vision care, and study leave) 4 1.6 211 respectively. Tenure privileges, comparable to those accorded to faculty members, were given to the head librarians at 215 institutions, or 86.3 percent. Jane Forgotson, formerly Supervising Science and Technology Librarian, Los Angeles State College, observed that "Sabbatical leaves for librarians are relatively 12 rare." Seemingly, this does not apply to the majority of head librarians of community colleges. Eligibility for sabbatical leaves was reported by 173 librarians, or 69.5 percent. i Although head librarians were accorded many of the i benefits and privileges usually reserved for members of the faculty, 72 institutions, or 28.9 percent, did not pay ■ them according to the faculty salary schedule. However, this may not mean that these head librarians were subjec- i ted to financial discrimination. Some institutions paid their head librarians supplementary amounts or percentages for their added administrative duties or placed them on separate, and usually higher, administrative salary ; schedules. I i Salaries. Of the 257 community colleges included in this study, 64 were not listed in Table 5 of the United States Office of Education publication, Library Statistics 1 P J-^Jane Forgotson, "A Staff Librarian Views the Problems of Status," College and Research Libraries. XXII (July, 1961), 275. 13 of Colleges and Universities, which covered the fall semester of 1968. An additional 48 institutions were included, but the salaries of the chief librarians were treated as confidential and not given. The 144 entries that gave the salaries for the head librarians are analyzed in Tables 43 and 44. According to Table 43 during the academic year 1968-69, the mean salary was $11,356 for American public community college head librarians with 9- 10 month contracts. Table 44 indicates that for the same academic year head librarians with 11-12 month contracts had a mean salary of $13,090. The respective median salaries were $11,300 and $12,957. Their salaries ranged from $6,600 to $16,562 and from $8,000 to $19,331 for 9-10 and 11-12 month contracts, respectively. California head librarians not only had the highest median salary, $13,714, but were the only ones under 9-10 month contracts with salaries greater than $13,000. Table 43 indicates that 12 of the 17 California librarians were in this position. Although no California head librarian had a salary of less than $10,000, 13 librarians in 11 other states had salaries that ranged from $6,600 to $9,750. Table 44 shows that of the 18 head librarians with salaries of $16,000 or more for 11-12 month contracts, 13U. S. Office of Education. Library Statistics of Colleges and Universities: Data for Individual Institutions. Fall 1968 (Washington.D. C.: Government Printing Office, 1969), pp. 133-168. Table 43 — SALARIES OF HEAD LIBRARIANS ON 9-10 MONTH CONTRACTS IN AMERICAN PUBLIC COMMUNITY COLLEGES, 1968-69 Under.7,000-•8,000-9,000-■10,000-11,000-12,000-13,000-•14,000- Over Mean State $7,000 7,999 8,999 9,999 10,999 11,999 12,999 13,999 14,999 14,999 Tot. Sal. Arizona 1 1 2 11,053 Calif. 1 2 2 5 2 5 17 13,714 Idaho 1 1 8,500 Kansas 1 1 2 8,293 Maryland 1 1 12,000 Michigan 1 1 1 3 11,167 Minnesota 1 1 11,800 Miss. 1 1 6,900 Missouri 1 1 9,450 Nebraska 1 1 8,944 New Jersey 1 1 11,900 No.Dakota 1 1 11,300 Oklahoma 1 1 2 6,800 Oregon 1 1 7,500 Texas 1 3 4 9,906 Utah 1 1 11,000 Wash. 1 1 1 1 4 10,900 Wisconsin 1 1 9.750 Total 2 4 3 4 6 8 6 5 2 5 45 $11,356 Table 44 -- SALARIES OF HEAD LIBRARIANS ON 11-12 MONTH CONTRACTS IN AMERICAN PUBLIC COMMUNITY COLLEGES, 1968-69 $8,000-9,000-10,000-11,000-12,000-13,000-14,000-15,000-16,000-17,000 Over Tot.Mean State 8,999 9,999 10,999 11,999 12,999 13,999 14,999 15,999 16,999 17,999 18,000 Sal. ' Ala. 2 1 3 8,835 A -*-*i ~ 1 T n i i r\ r A VJI- JTUiruy i ^ X D W l M f t l N O WIN X l - X i rnUXNJ_n V^VJIN J-Krt^AO AIN .HJYUAKACiUN PUBLIC COMMUNITY COLLEGES, 1968-69 $8,000- -9,000-■ 10,000-11 ,000-■12, GOO-■13, GOO-■14, GOO-15,000--16,000--17,000 Over Tot.Mean State 8,999 9,999 10,999 11,999 12,999 13,999 14,999 15,999 16,999 17,999 18,000 Sal. - Ala. 2 1 3 8,835 Ariz. 1 1 2 11,950 Calif. 1 1 3 4 7 4 2 22 16,251 Colo. 1 1 H',000 Florida 1 1 2 5 2 1 12 13,436 Georgia 2 2 4 10,999 111. 1 2 1 4 14,532 Indiana 1 1 8,300 Iowa 3 3 12,207 Maryland 1 1 1 3 13,429 Mass. 1 2 3 8,903 Mich. 1 1 3 1 2 8 14,847 Miss. 1 1 9,300 Missouri 1 1 2 11,964 N.Jersey 1 1 12,500 N. Carolina 4 1 5 9,599 Ohio 1 1 15,903 Oregon 1 1 2 10,979 Penn. 1 1 2 11,750 Tenn. 1 1 9,200 Texas 6 2 1 2 11 11,649 Virginia 1 1 10,750 Wash. 2 1 1 1 5 13,667 Wyoming_______________ Total 4 10 14 9 13 10 11 lO lO 6 2 99 $13,090 Maryland 1 1 Mass. 1 2 Mich. 1 1 Miss. 1 Missouri 1 1 N.Jersey 1 N.Carolina 4 1 Ohio Oregon 1 1 Penn. 1 1 Tenn. 1 Texas 6 2 1 Virginia 1 Wash. 2 Wyoming______________________1______________ Total 4 lO 14 9 13 lO 3 13,429 3 8,903 8 14,847 1 9,300 2 11,964 1 12,500 5 9,599 1 15,903 2 10,979 2 11,750 1 9,200 11 11,649 1 10,750 5 13,667 1 11,200 11 lO lO 6 2 99 $13,090 to H to 13 were located in California. The mean salary for California librarians was $16,251. For both 9-10 month contracts and 11-12 month contracts, this study found that the highest reported salaries anywhere in the nation were in California; the salaries were $16,562 and $19,331, respectively. Table 45 would perhaps suggest that the mean salary for head librarian fell somewhere between the salaries of associate professor and assistant professor. Level of Academic Achievement. It is generally recognized that professional qualifications and levels of academic achievement play important roles in promotion and j recognition on university campuses. As Arthur Bestor, Professor of History, University of Illinois, pointed out, universities are always in search of librarians who are also scholars, "and a Ph.D. in history or English litera ture or economics or biology was a valuable asset to a professional librarian, over and above his technical 14 training in cataloguing and bibliography." However, the possession of a doctorate as evidence of academic achieve ment was not required at the majority of community colleges. Today these institutions usually expect higher qualifications of their librarians than they formerly did; : t 14- . 1 Arthur Bestor, The Restoration of Learnxnq: A j Program for Redeeming the Unfulfilled Promise of American Education (New York: Alfred A. Knopf. 1956), p. 71. 215 Table 45 SALARIES OF FACULTY MEMBERS IN PUBLIC COMMUNITY COLLEGES, 1968-69 Academic Rank 9 Month3 Basis 11 Monthb Basis 12 Month0 Basis Professor $14,873 $16,526 $18,178 Associate Professor 12,416 13,796 15,175 Assistant Professor 10,435 11,595 12,754 Instructor 8,819 9,799 10,779 a,lRising Costs and the Public Institutions: the Annual Report on the Economic Status of the Profession, 1969-70," AAUP Bulletin. LVI (June, 1970), 197. ^Based upon the assumption that summer employment adds an increment of l/9th to the 9 month base salary. Based upon the assumption that summer employment adds an increment of 2/9th to the 9 month base salary. however, the head librarian with a doctorate is still a rarity on community college campuses. The possession of an A.B. degree and the completion ofa-.year's training in a graduate library school is usually considered adequate equipment for the community college librarian. In her 15 i study, Wheeler reported that 66.9 percent of the library i directors held the fifth-year accredited library degree or i more. Table 46 shows that of 173 head librarians studied j 1^Wheeler, op. cit.« p. 89. | 216 ! in this investigation, 158, or 91.3 percent, had met this j j j iminimum requirement. Of these, the majority had master's ! ; i ,degrees in library science, sometimes in combination with j ! I !subject area master's degrees, but 15 held bachelor's de- : i grees in library science based upon a year's study in grad-j uate school. An additional 10 librarians had subject area j j ' i master's degrees in addition to the graduate bachelor's de-i | ;grees in library science. Only 5 head librarians, or 2.9 jpercent, had received the Ph.D. degree, but many had pursu-j | j i ed additional graduate studies including some who were or j are presently doctoral candidates. Four head librarians had? ! - j j received no degree above the baccalaureate although all but| | one reported that they had pursued additional studies. j | Generally, the results of this investigation are j i * 1 j consistent with the 1962 study by John Caldwell, j I Librarian, California Lutheran College. In his examination! of the educational backgrounds of the head librarians in American colleges and universities, Caldwell found that 410, or 87.26 percent, of the 471 head librarians held I library degrees. This percentage was but slightly less I than that for the head librarians of community colleges as : determined in the present investigation. However, Caldwell | I found that a considerably greater percentage of the head j M l I— S 1€\john Caldwell, "Degrees Held by Head Librarians j | of College and Universities," College and Research jLibraries, XXIII (May, 1962), 227-228; 260. | Table 46— HIGHEST LEVEL OF ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT OF HEAD LIBRARIANS B.A. L.S. B.L.S.a M.L.S. State B.A. (L.S.) Cert. B.L.S. M.A. & M.A. M.L.S. & M.A. Ph.D. Total Alabama 1 5 6 Arizona 2 2 Calif. 2 1 3 24 11 41 Colorado 3 3 Florida 2 2 1 5 3 2 15 Georgia 5 5 Illinois 1 1 5 2 9 Iowa 3 3 Maryland 2 1 3 Mass. 1 1 Michigan 1 1 6 1 9 Minnesota 1 1 Mississippi 1 1 Missouri 1 2 3 Nebraska 1 1 New Jersey 2 2 New York 2 55 3 1 11 North Carolina 1 3 1 5 10 No. Dakota 1 1 Ohio 1 1 Oklahoma 2 2 Oregon 1 3 4 Penn. 1 1 3 5 Tennessee 3 2 Texas 1 1 9 4 1 16 Utah 1 1 Virginia 2 1 1 4 Washington 1 6 1 8m Table 46— (Cont.) State B.A. B.A. (L.S.) L.S. Cert. B.L.S. M.A. B.L.S.a & M.A. M.L.S. M.L.S. & M.A. Ph.D. Total Wisconsin Wyoming 2 1 2 1 Total 3 1 2 15 9 10 101 27 5 173 aIncludes some with 2 master’s degrees (non-L.S.) ^Includes sone with both B.L.S. and M.L.S. degrees. I 218 219 librarians held the doctorate, i.e., 18.71 percent vs. 2.89 percent. 17 In 1969 Schiller reported the results of her survey of approximately 2,500 librarians in 550 junior colleges, senior colleges, and universities. She found that 88 percent of the chief librarians had the first pro fessional degree or above. This percentage was slightly less than the 91.3 percent for head librarians as identi fied in the present study. Title of Head Librarian Considerable variety was evidenced in the titles that are either assigned to or used by the head librarians j of community colleges. Table 47 gives an indication of the; wide variety of titles found. The most common title, head librarian, or its variant, chief librarian, was used by 84 colleges, or 33.3 percent. Not particularly significant was the fact that 56 institutions, or 22.1 percent, used the title librarian since a considerable number of these colleges were staffed by only one librarian. The word j | director was a part of the title for an additional 79 j ! libraries or learning resource centers. Over one-half of these used the title director of library services. A recent development of particular interest was the — — . . 1 — — ■ ■ I ■■■■■!. I — — — ■^Schiller, op. cit. . pp. 31-36. 220 Table 47 TITLE OF THE HEAD LIBRARIAN Title Number Percentage Dean of the Library3 Associate Dean of Instruction, - - Library Services*5 3 1.2 Assistant Dean of the Library0 2 .8 Director of Learning Services^ Associate Director, 27 10.7 Learning Resources Center Assistant Dean, Instructional 1 .4 Resources 1 .4 Director of Library Services 40 15.8 Library Directore 11 4.3 Library Coordinator^ 9 3.6 Head Librarian 79 31.2 Chief Librarian 5 2.0 College Librarian 15 5.9 Chairman of Library Services^ 4 1.6 Librarian 56 22.1 Total 253 100.0 aThe author knows one librarian with this title who was unable to complete the questionnaire. ^Alternate title: Associate Dean of Instruction, Library Resources. Alternate title: Assistant Dean of Instruction, Library Services. j Alternate titles: Director of Learning Center; Director of Learning Resources; Director of Instructional j Materials; Coordinator, Learning Resources. 6 Alternate titles: Director of Libraries, Director of Library. i f f i Alternate title: Coordinator of Library Services.! 9Alternate titles: Chairman, Department of j Library Services; Chairman, Library Department. 221 observation that 29 institutions, or 11.5 percent, indica ted that their head librarians had titles specifically related to learning resource centers. This is in line with Johnson's comment that "An increasing number of junior colleges are establishing instructional resource centers, areas which are literally saturated with widely varied multi-media tools for learning and administered to facili- 1 8 tate the use of these tools.1 1 Only 6 respondents, or 2.4 percent, considered the position of head librarian to be of high enough administrative importance for the title of assistant dean or associate dean. Participation in Campus Affairs It is axiomatic that librarians should maintain a close relationship with all campus activities that relate to library philosophy, facilities, and services. Although some believe that these functions can be fulfilled effic iently by dedicated faculty members on the library commit tee, others are convinced that either the head librarian or his representative should serve as an ex-officio or elected; i ^member on various college committees. j 1®Bryon Lamar Johnson, Islands of Innovation : Expanding; Changes in the Community Colleges (Beverly : Hills, California; Glencoe Press, 1969), p. 163. ! 222 Table 48--DISTRIBUTION OF FACULTY SENATES IN PUBLIC COMMUNITY COLLEGES BY REGIONS AND STATES Region and No. with No. without Total State Faculty Senates Faculty Senates Middle States 24 5 29 Maryland 3 2 5 New Jersey 2 0 2 New York 13 3 16 Pennsylvania 6 0 6 New Enqland 3 1 4 Mas s achus e 11 s 3 1 4 North Central 36 16 52 Arizona 2 2 4 Colorado 2 0 2 Illinois 9 0 9 Indiana 0 1 1 Iowa 3 3 6 Kansas 1 1 2 Michigan 9 4 13 Minnesota 2 0 2 Missouri 4 0 4 North Dakota 0 1 1 Ohio 1 0 1 Oklahoma 1 1 2 Wisconsin 0 3 3 Wyoming 2 0 2 Northwest 17 6 23 Idaho 1 0 1 Montana 0 1 1 Nevada 0 1 1 Oregon 3 3 6 Utah 2 0 2 Washington 11 1 12 Southern 50 28 78 Alabama 0 4 4 Florida 13 3 16 Georgia 4 3 7 Kentucky 5 0 5 Mississippi 2 3 5 North Carolina 8 2 10 Tennessee 0 2 2 Texas 14 10 24 Virginia 4 1 5 Western 67 0 67 California 65 0 65 Hawaii 2 0 2 Total 197 56 253 Membership on the Faculty Senate. According to Table 48, there were faculty senates or academic councils on 197 campuses, or 77.8 percent of the respondents. These institutions were located in 29 states; the colleges in 7 states did not have faculty senates. Of particular interest is the observation that 60.4 percent of the colleges with faculty senates were located in only 5 states: California, Florida, New York, Texas, and Washing ton. In fact, 33 percent were situated in a single state-- California. This state is located in the area served by the Western Association of Schools and Colleges; it is the only region in which every reporting institution has a faculty senate, regardless of the size of the college as indicated by the faculty and the student body. In 1965 California's Winton Act mandated elections on every community college campus to determine which organization would represent the faculty. Many community colleges established their faculty senates at that time. Table 49 indicates that the existence of a faculty i senate was often determined by the size of the faculty. ! i Institutions with large-sized faculties generally had j | faculty senates while those with few faculty members often | did not. Of those colleges without faculty senates, 49, or 85.9 percent, had less than 100 faculty members. On the other hand, however, only 93 colleges with faculty senates, or 47.7 percent, had less than 100 faculty members. There 224 Table 49 CORRELATION BETWEEN THE SIZE OF THE FACULTY AND THE EXISTENCE OF A FACULTY SENATE AT A COMMUNITY COLLEGE Faculty Size With Faculty Senate Without Faculty Senate Total Colleges Less than 50 30 24 54 50- 99 63 25 88 100-149 37 2 39 150-199 27 5 32 200-249 16 — 250-299 10 1 11 300-349 5 5 350-399 3 3 More than 400 4 — 4 Total 195 57 252 was only one institution without a faculty senate that had more than 200 faculty members. Thirty-eight colleges with faculty senates had more than 200 faculty members. Table 50 shows the representation of libraries on faculty senates of community colleges. On 23 campuses, or ! I ; 12.3 percent, the library had no representation. The head * i librarian was an ex-officio member on 19 campuses, or 10.2 i i percent. At an additional 33 colleges, or 17.6 percent, ; the library was always represented on the faculty senate j but not necessarily by the head librarian. Finally, at 34 institutions, or 18.2 percent, the head librarian and a varying number of additional librarians were members of the senate. Therefore, it is evident that the library was rep resented on the faculty on 86 campuses, or 46 percent. However, the percentage is probably somewhat higher since on an additional 78 campuses, or 41.7 percent, there was the possibility of the head librarian or another librarian being chosen in the faculty election. The method of selec tion of the library representative on the faculty senate is indicated in Table 51 for those situations in which the library always had a member. There was ex-officio member- ship at 19 colleges, or 17.9 percent. On 35 campuses, or 33.1 percent, the library representative was selected by the professional members of the library staff in an elec tion. However, on 18 campuses, or 17 percent, the entire faculty determined the choice by ballot. All faculty mem bers were automatically members of the senate on 14 campuses, or 13.2 percent; this seems to imply that either the membership was not particularly meaningful or the college was quite small. At 17 institutions, or 16.1 per- j cent, the representative of the library on the faculty j senate was appointed by the college president (7.6 percent), the academic dean (1.9 percent), or the head librarian j ' | (6.6 percent). ; 226 Table 50 — LIBRARY REPRESENTATION ON THE FACULTY SENATES OF COMMUNITY COLLEGES Status Number Percentaoe Head Librarian is an ex-officio member 19 10.2 Library is always represented but not necessarily by head librarian 33 17.6 Library is always represented by head librarian and additional librarians3 . 34 18.2 Head librarian may be elected in a faculty election 41 21.9 A librarian other than the head librarian may be elected 37 19.8 Library is not represented 23 12.3 Total 187 100.0 ^Additional librarians may vary from 1-7. Table 51 — SELECTION OF THE LIBRARY REPRESENTATIVE ON THE FACULTY SENATE Means of Selection _________________ Number Percentage Ex-officio membership 19 17.9 By the faculty in an election 18 17.0 By the library in an election 35 33.1 Appointed by the head librarian 7 6.6 Appointed by the college president 8 7.6 Appointed by the academic dean 2 1.9 All of the faculty belong 14 13.2 Volunteer membership 1 .9 Library representative alternates with representative from counsellors 1 .9 Aribitrarv appointment 1 .9 Total_______________________________ 106______ 100.0 227 Membership on Committees. Committee work is often one of the most time-consuming tasks for academic person nel on college campuses. However, some consider member ship on an administrative council or committee that is advisory to the community college president as a most worthy assignment. The 252 institutions which responded to this query concerning the head librarian's membership on the council were almost equally divided in their replies. On 125 campuses, or 49.6 percent, he was a mem ber, but on 127 campuses, or.50.4 percent, he was not. Although 49 correspondents, or 41.2 percent, indicated in Table 52 that the councils offered advice to their respective college presidents in only those areas which he specifically requested, a slightly greater num ber, 59, or 49.6 percent, reported that the administrative councils themselves determined in which areas they would give advice. Significant numbers of the college adminis trative councils advised the chief administrative officers in such areas as educational policies and planning, curri culum, the administration of the institutions, and budget, with percentages of 68.9, 58.8, 42.9, and 42.9, respec- j tively. However, the percentages were considerably smaller in personnel and student matters, 29.4 and 22.7, • < respectively. Only 6 colleges, or 5 percent, said that the councils were free to advise their college presidents in all areas. 228 Table 52 AREAS IN WHICH ADMINISTRATIVE COUNCIL ADVISED COLLEGE PRESIDENT Areas Single Response Multiple Responses (N = 79) Total Responses (N = 119) No. % No. % No. % Only those areas requested by president 13 32.5 36 45.6 49 41.2 Areas determined by the council 14 35.0 45 57.0 59 49.6 Personnel matters ---- 27 34.2 27 22.7 Curriculum matters 4 10.0 66 83.6 70 58.8 Educational policies and planning 3 7.5 79 100.0 82 68.9 Student matters — ---- 35 44.3 35 29.4 Administration of the college 3 7.5 48 60.8 51 42.9 Budget matters 1 2.5 50 63.3 51 42.9 All areas 2 5.0 4 5.1 6 5.0 Total 40 100.0 Committees on community college campuses had a very wide variety of names. Although this investigation identified 105 different committee names (Table 53), it is probable that the actual number was somewhat greater since there were undoubtedly some additional committees of which the head librarians were not members. Forty of the committee names were used by 4 or fewer of the reporting institutions. An additional 5 names were employed by each of 8-11 colleges. Head librarians were members of 1-6 committees on 241 campuses; at only 16 institutions did the directors of the library either held no committee assignments or fail to provide the necessary data. This high percentage (93.8) would seem to suggest that there has been a small but significant increase since 1964 in the participation of head librarians in committee work. At 19 that time Wheeler reported that library directors were members of a campus committee at 81 of 93 colleges, or 87.1 percent. The head librarians were members of faculty libraryj committees at 174, or 72.2 percent, of the 241 colleges | with committees. Inasmuch as 211 institutions reported 20 that they had faculty library committees, it can be inferred that 37 colleges, or 17.5 percent, have library 19 Wheeler, op. cit.. p. 186. 20Infra., p. 241. j Table 53 — COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIPS OF HEAD LIBRARIANS Committee Name Single Response Multiple (N = Responses 153) Total (N Responses = 241) No. % No. % No. % Academic Regulations 3 4.0 29 19.0 32 13.3 Student Life 7 4.6 7 2.9 Educational Policies 6 8.0 50 32.7 56 23.2 Salary and Welfare 2 2.7 17 11.1 19 7.9 Transfer Curriculum 3 4.0 60 39.2 63 26.1 Vocational Curriculum 1 1.3 52 34.0 53 22.0 Curriculum3 8 8.0 27 17.6 33 13.7 Library 39 52.0 135 88.2 174 72.2 Other: 15 20.0 Academic Council*5 8 5.2 8 3.3 Academic Freedom 1 .7 1 .4 Administrative Council0 (1) 20 13.1 21 8.7 Admissions and Appeals 1 .7 1 .4 Adult Education 1 .7 1 .4 Bookstore Advisory 1 .7 1 .4 Budget‘ d 7 4.6 7 2.9 Buildinge 3 2.0 3 1.2 Campus Affairs 1 .7 1 .4 Commencement 1 .7 1 .4 Committee on Committees 1 .7 1 .4 Communications 1 .7 1 .4 Community Events 1 .7 1 .4 Computer^ 2 1.3 2 .8 Concert and Lecture (1) 1 .4 Courtesy 1 .7 1 .4 Cultural Affairs 1 .7 1 .4 Department Chairmen^ (2) 9 5.9 11 4.6 Experimental Programs 1 .7 1 .4 Faculty Handbook 1 .7 1 .4 Faculty in^Service 1 .7 1 .4 ITariil +ir Qona+oh fp) 2 1.3 4 1.7 Concert and Lecture Courtesy (1) 1 .7 1 1 .4 .4 Cultural Affairs 1 .7 1 .4 Department Chairmen^ (2) 9 5.9 11 4.6 Experimental Programs 1 .7 1 .4 Faculty Handbook 1 .7 1 .4 Faculty in^Service 1 .7 1 .4 Faculty Senate11 (2 ) 2 1.3 4 1.7 Financial Aids and Scholarship1 (1) 1 .7 2 .8 Fine Arts 2 1.3 2 .8 Graduation 1 .7 1 .4 Honor Society Insurance (1) 1 .7 1 1 .4 .4 Learning Resources^ (6) 16 10.5 22 9.1 Legislative Library Instruction (1) 1 .7 1 1 .4 .4 Long Range Planning1 * 8 5.2 8 3.3 Lyceum 1 .7 1 .4 Personnel 4 2.6 4 1.7 President's Advisory 2 1.3 2 .8 Professional Practices1 1 1 2 1.3 2 .8 Program11 2 1.3 2 .8 Promotion and Tenure0 2 1.3 2 .8 Public Relations 1 .7 1 .4 Registration 1 .7 1 .4 Sabbatical 1 .7 1 .4 Social 1 .7 1 .4 Space Allocation 1 .7 1 .4 Special Events 1 .7 1 .4 Textbook 1 .7 1 .4 Treasure 1 .7 1 .4 Vestibule 1 .7 1 .4 Total_______ 75_______100.0 aAlternate names: Curriculum and Instruction Committee, Curriculum Development Committee, Instruction Committee, and Instructional Council. 13Alternate names: Academic Committee, Academic Affairs Committee, and Advisory Committee on Academic Affairs. cAlternate names: Administrative Cabinet, Administrative Committee, Administrative Policy Committee, Administrative Staff Committee, College Administrative Legislative V-*-; _L • *± Library Instruction 1 .7 1 .4 Long Range Planning^ 8 5.2 8 3.3 Lyceum 1 .7 1 .4 Personnel^- 4 2.6 4 1.7 President's Advisory 2 1.3 2 .8 Professional Practices1 1 1 2 1.3 2 .8 Program11 2 1.3 2 .8 Promotion and Tenure0 2 1.3 2 .8 Public Relations 1 .7 1 .4 Registration 1 .7 1 .4 Sabbatical 1 .7 1 .4 Social 1 .7 1 .4 Space Allocation 1 .7 1 .4 Special Events 1 .7 1 .4 Textbook 1 .7 1 .4 Treasure 1 .7 1 .4 Vestibule 1 .7 1 .4 Total 75 100.0 aAlternate names: Curriculum and Instruction Committee, Curriculum Development Committee, Instruction Committee, and Instructional Council. kAlternate names: Academic Committee, Academic Affairs Committee, and Advisory Committee on Academic Affairs. cAlternate names: Administrative Cabinet, Administrative Committee, Administrative Policy Committee, Administrative Staff Committee, College Administrative Committee, College Council, Dean's Cabinet, Dean's Council, Director’s Staff Meeting, Executive Committee of the College, and President's Cabinet. ^Alternate names: Academic Committee, Academic Affairs Committee, and Advisory Committee on Academic Affairs. eAlternate name: Building and Grounds Committee. ^Alternate name: Computer Advisory Committee. to to O Table 53— (Cont.) 9 Alternate names: Division Chairmen Committee and Division Council. T_ Alternate names: Academic Senate and Faculty Forum. 1 Alternate names: Financial Aids Committee and Scholarship Committee. J Alternate names: A-V Services Committee, Committee on Foreign Resources, jEducational Materials Committee, Educational Media Committee, Instructional Affairs, !Committee, Instructional Council, Instructional Materials Committee, Instructional Resources Committee, Learning Center Planning Committee, and Media Committee. Alternate names: Branch planning Committee, Campus Expansion Committee, iCampus Planning Committee, Institutional Planning Committee, Master Planning ;Committee, and New Campus Planning Committee. 1 Alternate names: College Personnel Committee, Personnel and Budget Committee, and Personnel Policies Committee. mAlternate name: Professional Standards Committee. nAlternate name: College Program Coranittee. °Alternate name: Promotions Committee. w c x > committees of which library directors are not members. This percentage is more than 6 times the 2.82 percent 21 reported by Wheeler in her smaller sample. She found that only 2 colleges of 71 with faculty library committees did not include their head librarians as members. This study revealed that at 102 institutions, or 42.3 percent, the library directors were members of 1 or more curriculum committees. This figure compares quite 22 closely with the 40.74 percent reported by Wheeler in her earlier investigation. The lack of participation in curriculum development by over one-half of the head librarians seems to indicate a lack of awareness on the part of the administration and/or the faculty of the significant contributions that often can be made in this ; important area by knowledgeable librarians. However, it is possible that some librarians were not interested, too busy, or too timid to suggest participation. Although the author is convinced that every community college library should have an excellent basic collection of library : materials, he recognizes that the most important influence . upon the library's holdings should be the nature of the i curriculum. Head librarians may make contributions in ; curriculum development: (l) understanding of the types of 21 Wheeler, op. cit., p. 165. 22Ibid.. p. 186. 233 students, (2) an awareness of community and student needs in various subjects areas, and (3) a knowledge of legal policies and regulations. Summary From the preceding examination of the head librarian and his place in the American public community college, it was evident that he held a relatively high position in the structure of this academic institution. This was clearly apparent for several reasons: (1) the extreme care that went into his selection and appointment, (2) the level and breadth of his organizational responsibility, (3) his administrative and faculty status and the resultant benefits, and (4) the high level of his membership or eligibility for membership on the faculty senate. However, some areas were open for improvement. The range in which the salary of the head librarian fell when compared with the salaries of faculty members would suggest a lack of prestige. Of course, this may have been caused by his limited academic qualifications as suggested by the fact that few library directors of community colleges held the doctorate. Although head librarians were committee members on the majority of college campuses, the number of librarians who were members of committees other than the library committee should have been greater. ‘Also, there was evidence that the head librarian should 234 increase his participation in the curricular activities of the college. CHAPTER VIII | : . i ! • j COMMITTEES CONCERNING THE j COMMUNITY COLLEGE LIBRARY | | I : | The need and the opportunity for the head librarian to participate in American public community college matters was stressed in Chapter VII. This chapter j |examines the committees and organizations that are j ; I ;specifically related to the library and that enable admin- j I i iistrators, faculty members, and citizens to become aware | ; I of and, possibly, to participate in the activities of the i • | ;library. j Friends of the Library , j Although numerous Friends of the Library Groups j have been established as means of additional support for j public libraries and senior colleges and universities,'*' fewj public community college libraries have felt any need for such assistance since they are tax-supported. However, ad- ; ; 1 ; j i ministrators1 and librarians’ interest in such organiza- | ! tions may increase because of the drastic curtailment of ^Guy Redvers Lyle, The Administration of the College I Library, Third Edition (New York: H. W. Wilson Co., 1961)7 | pp. 355-357. | ......... 236 j llibrary support during the past two years. Only 14 institutions, or 5.7 percent, of the 246 respondents had ! established Friends of the Library groups to assist in the ; ;multi-faceted support of the community college library. | j : Table 54 shows that the head librarian was the most power- j ful moving force behind the establishment of this lay ;organization. He was solely responsible on 4 campuses, or ! 133.3 percent; at an additional 3 colleges, or 25 percent, j |he shared the responsibility with other groups or persons. ; i ■Generally, these Friends groups engaged in such activities j |as these: supplementing the library budget with individ- j ! | jual gifts, donations, bequests, and memorials; establishing; : i I scholarships for prospective librarians; and equipping rooms or areas of the library. Board of Trustees* Library Committee ' 2 ' Wilson and Tauber have observed that in very few North American universities do the boards of trustees have committees with the library as their sole concern. This judgment was equally true of community colleges; only 5 j colleges, or 2 percent of the 244 reporting institutions, i ■ had such committees. Table 55 demonstrates that community j ^Louis Round Wilson and Maurice Falcolm Tauber, The I University Library. Second Edition (New York: Columbia IUniversity Press, 1956), p. 43. 237 Table 54 ESTABLISHMENT OF FRIENDS OF THE LIBRARY GROUPS Responsible Person or Group Number Percentage College administration 1 8.3 Head librarian 4 33.3 Librarians other than the head librarian — — — Board of Trustees - -------- Interested citizens 2 16.7 Students - -------- Alumni - -------- Other; 5 41.7 College administration and head librarian (1) Head librarian and interested citizens (1) College administration, head librarian, interested citizens, and alumni (1) College administration and librarians other than the head librarian (1 ) Librarians other than the head librarian, interested citizens, and alumni (1 ) I Total 12 100.0 college library plans, problems, and progress were usually brought to the attention of the trustees by the adminis trative officers of the colleges: college presidents - 189 (83.6 percent), academic vice-presidents - 30 (13.3 per cent), and academic deans - 51 (22.6 percent). Obviously, the trustees sometimes received information concerning the library from two or three of these administrators. In only 34 institutions, or 15 percent, was the library the medium by which the trustees were kept informed. They received information directly from the head librarian, who met with the board regularly or as requested, from the faculty library committee minutes, from the administration's or library's annual report, and by a few minor means. Although only 13 respondents, or 4.8 percent, acknowledged that the trustees received no information concerning the library, it is probable that the actual total was somewhat higher since the college administrators mentioned above forward information to the boards at their discretion. In fact, some respondents checked also the item that indicated that the board received no information with the comment, "this is probably closer to the truth.» Student Library Committee Although community college students were members of O (faculty library committees on a large number of campuses, ] ^Infra.. p. 250. ___ Table 55— DISSEMINATION OF INFORMATION CONCERNING THE LIBRARY TO THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES Means Single Response Multiple Responses " Total Responses No. % No. % No. % Faculty library committee minutes 1 .6 5 7.0 6 2.7 Head librarian meets with board 4a 2.6 12b 16.9 16 7.1 President at his decretion 125 80.8 64 90.1 189 83.6 Academic vice-president at his discretion 9 5.8 21 29.6 30 13.3 Academic dean at his discretion 5 3.2 46 64.8 51 22.6 Board receives no information 5 3.2 8C 11.3 13 5.8 Annual report 3 1.9 5 7.0 8 3.5 Other t 3 1.9 Library sent all written reports 1 1.4 1 .4 Board receives little information 1 1.4 1 .4 Director, of Extension program (1) 1 .4 Lay Advisory Committee 1 1.4 1 .4 When requested by board from library (1) 1 1.4 2 .9 Monthly Newsletter and acqui sition list from library 1 1.4 1 .4 Special library committee of board(l) 1 .4 Total 155 100.0 _ aOne head librarian gave occasional reports to the board as requested. bSeven head librarians met occasionally with the board while another attended every third meeting. CA majority of these had also indicated that 1 or more of the administrators for- warded information to the board at their discretion. to U3 vo 240 there were only 11 separate student library committees at the 256 institutions that responded to the query. Table 56 indicates that the students were generally appointed by student government.officers or were elected in associated student body elections. At only a single college was the appointment a cooperative act by the college administration and the student government officers. The head librarian made the appointment on yet another campus. At the few community colleges with student library committees there seemed to be general and almost unanimous agreement that the following should be its functions: (l) assist students in the knowledge and understanding of library regulations; (2 ) perform public relations tasks for the library; (3) evaluate the quality of library service given to students; and (4) communicate the needs of stu dents to the library. In order to fulfill its functions more effectively the student library committee had to be aware of student opinions and complaints. Table 57 shows that the percentages for these functions as reported by the few colleges with student library committees were 91.7, 91.7, 83.3, and 100, respectively. However, only 4 institutions, or 33.3 percent, indicated that it was the ; responsibility of the student library committee to enforce | ! the regulations of the library. Table 56— SELECTION OF THE STUDENT LIBRARY COMMITTEE Selecting Person or Group Single Response Multiple (N = Responses 2) Total (N Responses = 11) No. % No. % No. % Associated student body 3 33.3 1 50 4 36.4 Student government officers (appointment) 5 55.6 2 100 7 63.6 College administration (appointment) - --- 1 50 1 9.1 Head librarian (appointment) 1 11.1 - — 1 9.1 Ex-officio - ---- - — - --- Total 9 100.0 Table 57— FUNCTIONS OF THE STUDENT LIBRARY COMMITTEE (N = 12) Function Multiple Responses No. % Help students to know and understand library regulations 11 91.7 Enforce library regulations 4 33.3 Perform public relations job for the library 11 91.7 Communicate needs of students to the library 12 100.0 Evaluate qualitv of librarv service to students 10 83.3 to . f c - 242 Community College Faculty Library Committee In the previous chapter in the examination of the committee memberships of head librarians on community college campuses, it was mentioned that 211, or 82.1 percent, of the 257 institutions studied had faculty library committees. This was a considerably higher per- 4 centage than that in the Wheeler study, which found that 71, or 68.9 percent, of the reporting libraries had library committees. It would therefore appear that a significant number of American public community colleges have accepted Harbold's observation concerning library committees in senior colleges and universities, 1 1 the core of the faculty organization for the library, is the faculty library committee. Status. Generally, it has been considered desirable in senior colleges and universities to limit the faculty library committee to a two-fold responsibility: an advisory role and a liaison function between the faculty ^Helen Rippier Wheeler, "The Community College ! Library; An Appraisal of Current Practice" (unpublished Ed.| iD. project, Columbia University, Teachers College,„1964), p. 164. ^William H. Harbold, "Policy Making and Control in j : College and University Libraries," College, University and |Special Libraries of the Pacific Northwest. Morton Kroll (ed.), (Pacific Northwest Library Association Development jProject Reports, 3; Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1961), p. 43. __..... . . . ___ ___ __ ___ 243 Table 58 STATUS OF THE FACULTY LIBRARY COMMITTEE Status Number Percentaqe Primarily advisory 198 95.6 Primarily administrative— but the execution is left to the head librarian 5 2.4 Primarily administrative— makes and executes decisions 1 .5 Advisory and administrative— but does not execute decisions 2 1.0 Advisory and administrative— executes decisions 1 .5 Total 207 100.0 and the library. Table 58 shows that this advisory role was common on community college campuses; at 198 institutions, or 96.6 percent of the respondents, the work of the committee was primarily advisory. At only 5 colleges, or 2.4 percent, was the work of the committee considered to be primarily administrative; however, even at these colleges the execution of the committee's deci- j | sions remained in the hands of the head librarian. One community college reported that the committee not onlyonl made but executed its decisions. ■ I | ! i 244 Functions. The committee's advisory and liaison functions were performed in many ways. Table 59 lists the variety of areas in which the faculty library committee assisted. Although many committees lent assistance in several areas, the area that involved library regulations was mentioned more often than any other. Of the 195 respondents, 148, or 75.9 percent, mentioned this area of responsibility. Particularly interesting was the observa tion that 105 institutions, or 53.8 percent, reported that I faculty library committees assisted in planning for new or ;remodeled library buildings. Probably some library committees did not become involved in this function because inew library quarters were not built and old quarters were not enlarged. In view of this, the level of involvement was probably higher than that suggested by the reported Ipercentage figure. Other areas of involvement reported by a considerable number of colleges were these: allocation of book funds - 33.3 percent, book selection - 39.5 per cent, and budget preparation - 17.4 percent. Liaison between the faculty and the library was ;usually viewed as one of the primary functions of faculty library committees. In her limited study of 70 college and university libraries in the Middle West, Kientzle reported that 52 librarians, or approximately 75 percent, jsaid that their library committees served a liaison Table 59--FUNCTIONS OF THE FACULTY LIBRARY COMMITTEE Functions Single Response Multiple Responses Total Responses (N = 154) (N = 195) No. % No. % No. % All areas 8 19.5 3 1.9 11 5.6 Allocation of book funds — ----------- 65 42.2 65 33.3 Book selection 5 12.2 72 46.8 77 39.5 Budget preparation 1 2.4 33 21.4 34 17.4 Library regulations 17 41.5 131 85.1 148 75.9 Personnel matters — ----------- 14 9.1 14 7.2 Planning new library building/remodeling 4 9.8 101 65.6 105 53.9 Staff salaries — — — - 2 1.3 2 1.0 Staff election — ----------- 4 2.6 4 2.1 Other: 6 14.6 As directed by chairman (1) — ----------- 1 .5 Audio-visual services 4 2.6 4 2.1 Circulation 1 .6 1 .5 Faculty orientation 1 .6 1 .5 Friends of the Library 1 .6 1 .5 Liaison with faculty and students (1) 13 8.4 14 7.2 Periodical selection and weeding 2 1.3 2 1.0 Policy formulation (4) 8 5.2 12 6.2 Public relations and communication 3 1.9 3 1.5 Self study 2 1.3 2 1.0 Special collections, gifts and rare books 2 1.3 2 1.0 Special programs V,. and proiects 3 1.9 3 1.5 Total 41 100.0 communication 3 1.9 3 1.5 Self study 2 1.3 2 1.0 Special collections, gifts and rare books 2 1.3 2 1.0 Special programs and pro i ects 3 1.9 3 1.5 Total 41 100.0 Table 60— FACULTY LIBRARY COMMITTEE LIAISON SERVICES BETWEEN FACULTY AND LIBRARY STAFF Single Response Multiple Responses Total Responses Service (n _= 107) (N =: 139) No. % No. % No. % Allocation of depart mental budget 3 9.4 38 35.5 41 29.5 Library regulations 10 31.2 90 84.1 100 71.9 Personnel matters 1 3.1 9 8.4 10 7.2 Planning for new library building 3 9.4 65 60.7 68 48.9 Preparation of library budget — -- 21 19.6 21 15.1 Selection of library materials 11 34.4 61 57.0 72 51.8 Other: 4 12.5 A-V planning 1 .9 1 .7 Changes/improvements of services (1) 7 6.5 8 5.8 I n t e r p r e t s l i b r a r y resources and encourages use (1) 6 5.6 7 5.0 Library procedures and policies 4 3.8 4 2.9 More staff in library 1 .9 1 .7 Publicity 1 .9 1 .7 Wherever needed (2) 1 .9 3 2.2 Total 32 100.0 Service Single Response Multiple Responses (N = 107) Total (N = Responses = 139) No. % No. % No. % Allocation of depart mental budget 3 9.4 38 35.5 41 29.5 Library regulations 10 31.2 90 84.1 100 71.9 Personnel matters 1 3.1 9 8.4 10 7.2 Planning for new library building 3 9.4 65 60.7 68 48.9 Preparation of library budget — --- 21 19.6 21 15.1 Selection of library materials 11 34.4 61 57.0 72 51.8 Other: 4 12.5 A-V planning 1 .9 1 .7 Changes/improvements of services (!) 7 6.5 8 5.8 Interprets library resources and encourages use (1) 6 5.6 7 5.0 Library procedures and policies 4 3.8 4 2.9 More staff in library 1 .9 1 .7 Publicity 1 .9 1 .7 Wherever needed .. (2) 1 .9 3 2.2 Total 32 100.0 to 246 function between the library and the faculty. This was also true on 141 community college campuses, or 70.5 percent; obviously, 59 colleges, or 29.5 percent, reported that their faculty library committees did not serve this liaison function. As can be seen from Table 60, there was a high correlation between the liaison services and the functions of the faculty library committees. When the area of library regulations within these two functions was examined, it was found that the percentages were 71.9 and 75.9, respectively. Similar positive relationships existed, whether the degree of participation was minimal or maximal, in such areas as these: the preparation of the library budget, allocation of departmental budgets, per sonnel matters, and plans for new or enlarged library quarters. There was no similar high correlation in the selection of books and other library materials; here the percentages were 51.8 and 39.5, respectively. Involvement in Library Development. During the years 1965-1969, the faculty library committees on 177 ! campuses reportedly were involved in one or more areas of | i I library matters; however, in many cases the level of actual activity was minimal. When the respondents ranked ^Elizabeth Kientzle, "Study of Relationships among College and University Administrators, Library Committees and Librarians" (unpublished M.A. thesis, University of Chicago, 1949), p. 80. 247 ! the committees' degrees of participation, there was no positive correlation in any area of involvement. The highest correlation was in the area of library regulations. According to Table 61 there was a median of 2 for the 169 I institutions that rated the levels of involvement of the committees during the specified years. The committees' activity level ranged from moderate to high to very high ; at 104 colleges, or 61.5 percent. Of the 147 library committees that reported on their involvement in the iplanning of new or enlarged library quarters, 67 indicated ; i I j a moderate or greater degree of participation. However, the median was only 1 because 52 replies stated that their committees had taken no action. If new library quarters ; ; had been built or old quarters enlarged, the level of involvement undoubtedly would have been higher. With a median of 1 , the committees' involvement in book selection ' was minimal. Little or no action in book selection was | ; taken for the five-year period under consideration by 95 of the 143 faculty library committees. This is also the trend in four-year colleges and universities as librarians ; | assume the responsibility for book selection. Biblio- j I graphers are now found in most libraries of moderate or i large size. Least active participation was in the areas i of personnel matters, staff selection, and staff salaries; | i :the median was 0 in each case. j Table 61— INVOLVEMENT OF THE FACULTY LIBRARY COMMITTEE IN LIBRARY DEVELOPMENT, 1965-1969 Areas of Involvement 0 1 Rank 2 3 4 Med ian Allocation of book funds 80 25 20 12 6 0 Book selection 68 27 30 12 6 1 Budget preparation 94 24 10 4 3 0 Library regulations 25 40 69 19 16 2 Personnel matters 106 12 6 3 1 - 0 Planning new library building/remodeling 52 28 37 20 10 1 Staff salaries 117 4 3 1 -- 0 Staff selection 115 7 2 1 — 0 Other: Audio-visual planning ■ ■ « ■ ■ M m m 1 1 1 3 Classification system w m m m m m m m m _ _ 1 m m m m 3 Collection development m m m m » m m m m m m _ _ — 1 m m m m 3 Evaluation of self-study a m m » • m m m m M • * 2 m m m 3 Publicity and exhibits --- --- 1 -- 2 Regional accreditation --- --- -- 1 -- 3 Selection of periodicals w t m m m _ ^ 1 m m m 1 3 Special events --- --- 1 -- 2 Use of library materials 2 1 3 3.5 Rank: 0 = s no action, 1 = little action, 2 s = moderate action, 3 = large action, 4 = very large action. 249 Composition. The interests of faculty members appeared to be well represented by the faculty library committees of American public community colleges. ; Actually, the faculty, quantitatively, was better repre sented on the committee than the library. According to Table 62, faculty members were on the library committees j of 208 colleges, or 97.7 percent of the responses. There was faculty representation on the committees of 3 additional institutions that reported that the committees j were composed solely of members of the faculty senate, j division heads, or representatives of academic departments : respectively. Therefore, the strange conclusion is that 2 faculty library committees were composed of campus person- i nel other than faculty members. An attempt was made to give a balanced representation by academic discipline on the library committee by 180 colleges, or 87.8 percent. That the head librarian was a member of the faculty library committee at all colleges surveyed in their; 7 8 separate investigations was reported by Lyle and Peeler. Therefore, the head librarian or another member of the | library's professional staff would have been expected to bej 7 Lyle, op. cit., p. 38. Q , Elizabeth Hastings Peeler, "Functions and Duties 1 of Faculty Library Committees in Colleges" (unpublished | M.S. thesis, Columbia University, School of Library I Service, 1950), p. 17. I__................ . .. ....... . . . _.......................................... ............................. Table 62 250; COMPOSITION OF THE FACULTY LIBRARY COMMITTEE (N = 213) Category of Membership Number Percentage Administrators 79 , 37.1 Board of Trustees' members 2 .9 Faculty members 208 97.7 Head librarian 201 94.4 Librarians other than head librarian 66 31.0 Library clerical staff, including library clerks 3 1.4 Non-library clerical staff 3 1.4 Students 112 52.6 Other: College Council (Deans) 1 .5 Counsellor 1 .5 Departmental representatives 1 .5 Director of Audio-visual Services 6 2.8 Director of Learning Resource Center 1 .5 Division heads 3 1.4 Faculty senate 2 .9 Townspeople 1 .5 on the library committee at each public community college. Although there were such memberships on the majority of the committees studied, a few institutions seemingly did not have such representation. The head librarian was a member ; of the committee at 201 colleges, or 94.4 percent. A j librarian other than the library director was the library's| only representative on the committees at an additional 5 9 institutions. There were, thus, 206 committees, or 96.7 percent, that had representation from the professional library staff. On the other hand, however, there were 7 committees, or 3.3 percent, with the anomaly of having no j representation from the library. j Faculty library committees were sometimes composed,1 not only of faculty members and librarians, but of college ; administrators and students, It is interesting and com mendable to note that members of the administrative staff of only 79 institutions, or 37.1 percent, served on these library committees; however, students on 112 campuses, or 52.6 percent, were members. There appeared to be some j ! evidence that the degree of administrative involvement was j i ! decreasing while the level of student involvement was increasing. Of interest, also, was the observation that a few committees had administrative and student members but ^However, there were a number of colleges in which | there was dual representation from the library. i 252 no library representation; the number of members for the former groups were 5 and 14, respectively. Board of Trustees' members were on the library committees on 2 ' campuses. A local resident was a committee member on a single campus. The library, as has been mentioned, was represen- j ted on the library committee of all except a few community ! i 1 ;colleges. Table 63 gives the position of the head librarian on the faculty library committee. On 79 commit- j tees, or 39.5 percent, the library director served as the j i j : chairman of the committee. This was somewhat more than | t ! Peeler' 1 ' 0 found in 1950 and slightly less than Wheeler11 ! j reported in her 1964 investigation. Peeler discovered | i that the library director was chairman of the committee at ; j l 22 colleges, or 32.35 percent; whereas Wheeler found that j he served as chairman at 32, or 45.07 percent. It seems obvious that the majority of committees on community i college campuses have followed Lyle's recommendation that i the head librarian not be the chairman of the faculty j library committee. In his rationale of this position, , j : Lyle reasons: j ; I I ; I : ! ; I 1 i j I ; j 10Peeler, loc. cit. ! 11Wheeler, op. cit., p. 165. j 253 Table 63 POSITION OF THE HEAD LIBRARIAN ON THE FACULTY LIBRARY COMMITTEE Position Single Response Multiple Responses (N = 101) Total Responses 1 (N = 200) i No. % No. % No. % Chairman 31 31.3 48 47.5 79a 39.5 Secretary 4 4.0 23 22.8 27 13.5 Ex-officio member 28 28.3 34 33.7 62 31.0 Prepares agenda 8 8.1 89 88.1 97 48.5 Advisor 21 21.2 41 40.6 62 31.0 i Member 7 7.1 — — _ _ M — 7 3.5 1 Total 99 100.0 aFour reported that the head librarian was not neces j sarily the chairman although he was at the time of the | study.___________________________________________________ _ .... Since the committee discusses matters of policy, it would seem unwise for the librarian to serve as chairman. The committee that gets the reputation among the faculty of being a rubber stamp for the librarian is not likely to be effective either as ad viser or interpreter of library matters. It is exceed-! ingly difficult, moreover, for one who is actively j engaged in administering a library to refrain from j dominating the discussion of topics and consequently | discouraging the less articulate members of the commit-j tee from taking part in the discussion.^ j 12 Lyle, op. cit., p. 39. There was but scant evidence from this investiga tion that library committees in public community colleges i have followed Lyle's suggestion that the head librarian i I serve as secretary: "In this capacity he can make sure j that the officient minutes are faithfully recorded, trans mitted to the members of the committee and others concern- ; TQ : ed, and that a file of the minutes is preserved." The library director was the secretary on only 27 committees, j ; or 13.5 percent. This was considerably less than one-half i ; 14 I : of the percentage reported by Peeler in her 1950 study j ; • I i of 68 senior college faculty library committees. At that i ; j ; t time she found that the head librarian was the secretary ! | l i of 23 committees, or 33.82 percent. j : | j Therefore, it was evident that there were actually j 102 committees, or 51 percent, on which the head librarian served as a member but not as an officer. This was con- j siderably higher than the 22 committees, or 32.25 percent, j 15 ! given by Peeler, but not quite as high as the 42 commit- < i tees, or 59.15 percent, tabulated by Wheeler.1^ The agenda for meetings of the faculty library j committee was prepared by the head librarian at 97 insti- ! tutions, or 48.5 percent of the committees of which he was ' a member. However, the percentage increased to 55.4 in 13Ibid. 15Ibid. 14 Peeler, loc. cit. ■^Wheeler, loc. cit. Table 64 255 PREPARATION OF THE AGENDA FOR THE FACULTY LIBRARY COMMITTEE Person Who Prepared Agenda Number Percentage | Head Librarian 97 55.4 Chairman of committee 70 40.0 | a Secretary of committee 5 2.9' Informal consensus during discussion 2 1.1 Colleoe President 1 .6 i Total 175 100.0 l i aOther than the head librarian 1 Table 64 since a number of respondents did not complete this portion of the questionnaire. In 68 cases, or 34 per-! i cent, the director of the library performed this function j I in conjunction with his assignment as either the chairman or the secretary of the committee. He prepared the agenda j for committee meetings in 37 situations, or 18.5 percent, j in which he held no committee office. When the head j I librarian was neither the chairman nor the secretary of the committee, the chairman usually prepared the agenda. Table 64 shows that on 70 committees, or 40 percent, the chairman was responsible for the agenda; whereas at only 5 institu tions, or 2.9 percent, was this assignment given to the secretary. At a single college the agenda for committee j meetings was the responsibility of the college president. i Committee size. Published statements concerning j the average or recommended size for faculty library j 17 ! committees vary. Although Lyle mentioned in 1949 that the size of the committee could vary from 4 to 9 with a median size of 6 members, by 1961 he wrote, "The committee j may be small (. . . five members) or it may be large (. . . twelve). To speak of an average would be meaning- 18 ■ less." However, the present investigation showed that faculty library committees at public community colleges : varied from 4 to 26 members with a mean size of 9.1 and a j median size of 8 . This may suggest that library committees! I at community colleges tend to be somewhat larger than ; similar committees at senior colleges. : If the library committee is to have adequate departmental representation, it will necessarily be quite large. It is much less difficult to arrange meetings if the committee is composed of relatively few persons. In the selection of the committee, personal qualifications and interest in the purpose and program of the library are more! important than departmental representation. •^Guy Redvers Lyle, The Administration of the College Library. Second Edition (New York: H. W. Wilson Co., 1949), p . 47. 18Lyle, Third Edition, op. cit., p. 38. ! 257 Qualifications for Membership. Many authors believe that the faculty library committee should base its membership primarily on departmental representation. Charles E. Friley, Dean, Division of Science, and Vice- President, Iowa State College, observed: . . . the library committee should be fairly represen tative of all departments. This, of course, does not mean that every department should be represented, but the membership should be so selected that the larger fields of educational activity will have adequate recognition. However, Lyle suggested that most libraries held i the view that "personal qualifications and general interest !in the library are more important considerations than departmental representation in the selection of the 20 committee." As may be seen from Table 65, the findings of this investigation seem to corroborate Lyle’s judgment. An interest in library matters and/or library materials was considered an important qualification for committee member ship by 120 respondents, or 58 percent. In fact, this was the only qualification checked by 71 of the librarians. Although departmental representation was mentioned specifi- pi cally by only 19 colleges, or 9.2 percent, the actual - ^ C h a r l e s Edwin Friley, "College Library Control," ALA Bulletin. XXIX (February, 1935), 69. 2< ^Lyle, Third Edition, loc. cit. 21 Of course, it is recognized that the total would have been higher if the specific query had been included on the questionnaire. Table 65— FACULTY LIBRARY COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP QUALIFICATIONS Qualification Single Response Multiple Responses (N = 60) Total (N Responses = 207) No. % No. % No. % Conscientious and dedicated committee worker 4 2.7 14 23.3 18 8.7 Interest in library matters and/or library materials 71 48.3 49 81.7 120 58.0 Ex-officio membership 3 2.0 57 95.0 62 30.0 Rotating membership 16 10.9 35 58.3 51 24.6 No discernible, pertinent qualifications 35 23.8 22 36.7 57 27.5 Other: 18 12.3 Departmental/Divisional repres entation (10) 9 15.0 19 9.2 Presidential appointee (1) 2 3.3 3 1.4 Dean's appointee (3) - ------ 3 1.4 Administrative fiat (1) - ------ 1 .5 Volunteers appointed by senate president 1 1.7 1 .5 Curriculum committee members (3)a — ------ 3 1.4 Total 147 100.0 ^he members of the curriculum committee at one institution were department chairmen. 258 259 level was undoubtedly much higher. There was ex-officio membership on the committee, generally by the head librarian, at 62 institutions, or 30 percent. This figure 22 was approximately triple the percentage given by Wheeler for the ex-officio position of the library director on the committee, i.e., 7 librarians, or 9.86 percent. According to 57 respondents, or 27.6 percent, there were no discernible, pertinent qualifications for appoint ment or election to the faculty library committee. This was the only response by the representatives of 35 colleges, or 23.8 percent. However, it was particularly interesting to note that 6 persons in their multiple responses were contradictory as they indicated that there were no apparent qualifications at the same time that they specified that a pertinent qualification was an evident interest in libraries and their holdings. Appointing Body or Person. No set pattern could be found for the method of appointment of the faculty library ; OQ committee. Wilson and Tauber suggested that the responsibility for committee appointments should be assumed l 24 by the president. According to Elizabeth Kientzle, j 22Wheeler, loc. cit. 23 Wilson and Tauber, op. cit., pp. 43-44. P4 ^Elizabeth Kientzle, "The College Librarian and the Library Committee," Library Quarterly. XXI (April 260 three-fourths of the library committee members were appointed by the president while the majority of the 25 remaining one-fourth were selected by the faculty. Lyle listed three general methods by which members of the committee were selected: (l) appointment by the president, (2) appointment by the dean, and (3) election or appoint ment by the faculty or the faculty senate. As seen in Table 66, this pattern was evident in the libraries under investigation, with percentages of 35, 30.1, and 27.2. When only a single response was indicated, the comparable percentages were 30.1, 21.1, and 19.6. By way of compari- 27 son, Wheeler reported that the percentages jwere 49.3, 26.76, and 12.68, respectively. A college administrator was involved in the appointment or selection of the faculty library committee on 155 campuses, or 75.2 percent, whereas a the faculty or faculty committees participated on slightly less than one-half of this total, i.e., on 66 campuses, or 32 percent. Students or student body officers were involved in the selection of members of the faculty library committee at only 32 community colleges, or 15.5 percent. On one ^Lyle, Third Edition, loc. cit. pz: The latter is from the sum of these percentages: faculty - 19.9 and faculty senate - 7.3. 27 Wheeler, loc. ext. Table 66— SELECTION OF THE FACULTY LIBRARY COMMITTEE Appointing body or person Single Response Multiple Responses (N = 83) Total (N : Responses = 206) No. % No. % No. % Board of Trustees — ------ 2 2.4 2 1.0 President 37 30.1 35 42.2 72 35.0 Academic Vice-President 9 7.3 7 8.4 16 7.8 Academic Dean 26 21.1 36 43.4 62 30.1 Assistant Dean — — — 2 2.4 2 1.0 Head Librarian 3 2.4 26 31.3 29 14.1 Faculty 12 9.8 29 35.0 41 19.9 Students — -------- 28 33.7 28 13.6 Clerical staff — -------- 1 1.2 1 .5 Volunteer membership 2 1.6 10 12.0 12 5.8 Faculty senate 12 9.8 3 3.6 15 7.3 Department/Division Chairmen 9 7.3 7 8.4 16 7.8 Other: 13 10.6 Associated student body officers 4 4.9 4 1.9 College Forum Committee (1) — ------ 1 .5 Committee on Committees (5) 1 1.2 6 2.9 Curriculum Committee (2 ) — ------ 2 1.0 Dean of Students appoints student members 1 1.2 1 .5 Learning Resources Center Com. (1) - ------ 1 .5 President & Faculty Senate (2) - ------ 2 1.0 President's cabinet (1) - - — 1 .5 Special Ad Hoc Committee appointed by the Dean (1) - ------ 1 .5 Teachers' Union names specific number of members 2 2.4 2 1.0 Total________________ 123 100.0 ,261 campus the dean of students appointed student members of the committee. This low level of participation is inter esting since one would have anticipated greater involvement because there were student committee members at 52.6 28 percent of the institutions. That the head librarian participated in the process by which library committee members were appointed or selec ted on only 29 campuses, or 14.1 percent, may have been a OQ drawback. Kientzle reported that her study had indicated that less than one-half of the committee members were selec ted with the advice of the librarian. Although the writer would not suggest that the head librarian should appoint committee members (only 3 library directors did so), the failure to seek his guidance on most campuses may be unfor tunate since a perceptive and knowledgeable librarian is in a position to evaluate the interest of faculty members in the library. Although only 2 institutions stated that their library committees were composed solely of volunteers and another 10 indicated that they were partially volunteer, the actual total was probably somewhat higher since severalj of the respondents appended comments similar to this, "The j dean appoints volunteers." j _________________________ j 28Supra, p. 250. | ^Kientzle, "The College Librarian. . .," op. cit., p. 122. j 263 There appeared to be but little labor union involvement in the naming of committee members. Only 2 institutions, both in Wisconsin, mentioned the participa tion of unions in the selection. At one community college the president of the teachers1 union appointed an undesignated number of faculty members while at the other institution the union bargaining agent selected five members from the faculty. Governing Rules. The differing ways by which faculty library committees were governed are summarized in Table 67. At somewhat more than one-half of the institu tions the library committees had no formal regulations or rules of order. Approximately 40 percent of these committees were governed by comprehensive regulations that applied to all campus organizations. Less than 10 percent of the library committees were governed by formal rules or regulations. Table 67— GOVERNING RULES OF THE FACULTY LIBRARY COMMITTEE Regulation Single Response Multiple Responses (N = 8) Total Responses (N = 208) (No. % No. % (No. % Governed by formal rules/regulations 12 6 6 75 18 8.7 Governed by regulations which apply to all campus com. 77 38 8 100 85 40.9 Committee has no formal regulations 111 56 2 25 113 54.3 Total 200 100 264 Table 68--LENGTH OF TERM ON THE FACULTY LIBRARY COMMITTEE Length of Term Number Percentage One year 110 52.9 Two years 15a 7.2 Three years 18 8.6 More than 3 years --- Permanent appointment 3 1.4 Indefinite*5 60 28.9 No rule vet 2 1.0 Total 208. 100 aOne library reported that unproductive members dropped after one year. : were DGenerally varied from 1 to 3 years However, one li- brary reported that members continued college or asked to be removed. until they left the Length of Term. As is evident from Table 68, there was no uniformity in the length of faculty library commit tee terms at public community colleges. The length of term; was one year at 110 institutions, or 52.9 percent. Two- year appointments were made at 15 colleges, or 7.2 percent, and three-year appointments on 18 campuses, or 8.6 percent,; At 60 institutions, or 28.9 percent, committee appointments were of indefinite length; these generally varied from 1 to- 3 years. This percentage of appointments of indefinite 301 length was comparable to the figure suggested by Kientzle. ■ In one-half of the institutions she surveyed, 50 percent of! i I the appointments were for indefinite periods. At only 3 j community colleges, or 1.4 percent, were permanent appoint-j ! I !ments made. Table 69— LIMIT OF SERVICE ON FACULTY LIBRARY COMMITTEE Length of Service Number Percentage One term Two terms Three terms j Four terms I Five terms Six terms No limit 10 6 2 2 1 181 4.9 3.0 1.0 1.0 .5 89.6 Total 202 100.0 S Lyle counsels, "A wise provision which insures con- !tinuity without sterility is the plan of rotating member- i i |ship on the committee, with one or two new professors I . 31 ireplacing old members each year." i Number of Terms. The number of terms that library I |committee members might serve is given in Table 69. There was no limit on the number of terms or years that members might remain on committees at 181 institutions, or 89.6 percent. With the remaining 21 respondents the number of allowable terms varied from 1 to 6; however, 10 of these Iwere for only a single term. Frequency of Meetings. As may be seen from Table 170, there was no established pattern for the frequency of ! meetings of faculty library committees. Their frequency varied from weekly for 4 committees to yearly for 12 i (Committees to never for 2 committees. Most popular (frequencies were monthly, quarterly, or semi-yearly, here 31 Lyle, Third Edition, op. cit.. p. 38. 266 Table 70— FREQUENCY OF FACULTY LIBRARY COMMITTEE MEETINGS Frequency Number Percentage Weekly 4 1.9 Semi-monthly 5 2.4 Monthly 52 24.5 Bi-monthly 10 4.7 Quarterly 45 21.2 Semi-yearly 33 15.6 Yearly 12 5.7 Upon request 40 18.9 When necessary 9 4.3 Never 2 1.0 Total 212 100.0 the percentages were 24.5, 21.2, and 15.6, respectively. ; Although only 49 institutions, or 23.2 percent, stated that their committees met either upon request or when necessary, Table 71 suggests that 161 committees, or 75.9 percent, did not meet regularly. Generally, it was the committee chairman, the head librarian, or a committee member who requested the meeting of a committee at other than its scheduled time; the percentages were 72.7, 46.6, and 18, respectively. Distribution of Minutes. There appears to be i evidence in the literature that library committee minutes ;should be transmitted regularly to committee members, college administrative officers, and others concerned. ;Lyle wrote: 267 Table 71 CONVENING OF THE FACULTY LIBRARY COMMITTEE Requestee Single Response Multiple Responses (N = 58) Total Responses (N = 161) No. % No. % No. % Chairman 64 62 53 91.4 117 72.7 Secretary 4 4 5 8.6 9 5.6 Head Librarian 31 30 44 75.9 75 46.6 Committee Member 2 2 27 46.6 29 18.0 Other: 2 2 Student 1 1.7 1 . 6 President (1) 1 1.7 2 1.2 Academic Vice- President 1 1.7 1 . 6 Academic Dean (1) 1 1.7 2 1.2 Dean of Learning Resources 1 1.7 1 .6 Coordinator of Media Center 1 1.7 1 .6 Any faculty member 1 1.7 1 .6 Anyone with good reason 3 5.2 3 1.9 Total 103 100 268 Since these minutes contain decisions affecting library services and since they frequently contain recommendations or resulutions directed to the chief college administrative officers, they should be trans mitted regularly to the president, dean, and chief bus iness officer for information as well as for action on measures recommended therein. It would be helpful if the committee in all instances could be sure of having an earnest and sincere hearing from the higher author ity on anything it chooses to discuss or recommend, and if— when its recommendations seem workable— there could be brisk positive action taken on them.32 Committee minutes were circulated to some extent on 162 community college campuses, or 77 percent. However on 47 campuses, or 23 percent, the minutes were not distribu ted even to the members of the library committees. This was a much smaller percentage than the 47 percent reported 33 by Kientzle in 1949 for the college and university libraries in the Middle West. Table 72 indicates that committee minutes were distributed generally to committee members, college presidents, and faculty members; the per centages were 72.2, 66.7, and 45.1, respectively. There was minimal transmission of the minutes to boards of trus tees, students, and members of clerical staffs. Little evidence was suggested to indicate that library committees ; were vehicles of communication to the extent that they ! could and should be. ! 32Ibid.. p. 39. ^Kientzle, "Study of the . . . ,1 1 op. cit.. p. 74. Table 72 DISTRIBUTION OF FACULTY LIBRARY COMMITTEE MINUTES Recipient Single Response Multiple Responses (N = 126) Total Responses (N = 162) No. % No. % No. % Committee members 17 47 100 79.4 117 72.2 Board of trustees 1 3 9 7.1 10 6.2 College president 4 11 104 82.6 108 66.7 Vice-president — — 6 4.8 6 3.7 Academic dean — — 33 26.2 33 20.4 Other administrators — — 3.2 25.4 32 19.8 Department/Division Chairmen 1 3 8 6.3 9 5.6 Faculty 12 33 61 48.4 73 45.1 Students 1 3 10 7.9 11 6.8 Clerical staff — -- 12 9.6 12 7.4 Library clerks — — 13 10.3 13 8.0 Other: Academic council Administrative council Assistant Director, Instructional Services 1 1 2 .8 .8 1.6 1 1 2 .6 .6 1.2 Clerical staff — — 12 9.6 12 7.4 Library clerks — — 13 10.3 13 8.0 Other: Academic council 1 .8 1 .6 Administrative council 1 .8 1 .6 Assistant Director, Instructional Services 2 1.6 2 1.2 Business manager 2 1.6 2 1.2 Director of Student Services 1 .8 1 .6 Faculty senate 4 3.2 4 2.5 Librarians 5 4.0 5 3.1 Registrar 1 .8 1 .6 Steering committee 2 1.6 2 1.2 To all on request 1 .8 1 .6 Total 36 100 Table 73 RECIPIENTS OF FACULTY LIBRARY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS Recipient Single Response No. % Multiple Responses (N = 125) No. % Total Responses (N = 205) No. % Board of trustees — — 1 .8 1 .5 President 3 3.8 57 45.6 60 29.3 Academic Vice-President 1 1.2 12 9.6 13 6.3 Academic Dean 5 6.2 51 40.8 55 26.8 Assistant Dean _ — m mm m 3 2.4 3 1.5 Faculty Senate 3 3.8 13 10.4 16 8.3 Director of Learning Resources 3a 3.8 20b 16.0 23 11.2 Head librarian Other: Academic Affairs Committee A r 1 m * i r»*i c + r a + i t r o P r v n n r * * ? 1 C 65 81.2 122 1 a 97.6 .8 O A . 187 1 a 91.2 .5 l c : To all on request Total 36 100 1 .8 1 .6 Table 73 RECIPIENTS OF FACULTY LIBRARY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS Recipient Single Response Multiple Responses (N = 125) Total Responses (N = 205) No. % No. % No. % Board of trustees — — 1 .8 1 .5 President 3 3.8 57 45.6 60 29.3 Academic Vice-President 1 1.2 12 9.6 13 6.3 Academic Dean 5 6.2 51 40.8 55 26.8 Assistant Dean _ _ M 3 2.4 3 1.5 Faculty Senate 3 3.8 13 10.4 16 8.3 Director of Learning Resources 3a 3.8 20b 16.0 23 11.2 Head librarian 65 81.2 122 97.6 187 91.2 Other: Academic Affairs Committee 1 .8 1 .5 Administrative Council0 3 2.4 3 1.5 Appropriate Faculty-Student Committee 1 .8 1 .5 Department Chairmen 2 1.6 2 1.0 Director of Instructional Services (A-V) 1 .8 1 .5 Faculty members 4 3.2 4 2.0 Learning Resources Center Executive Council 1 .8 1 .5 Total 80 100.0 Two responses were also head librarians. bOne response was also the head librarian. cAlternate title; College Cabinet.__________ to 270 Transmittal of Committee Recommendations. That most faculty library committees are advisory, not adminis trative, and thus do not execute their decisions has al- 34 ready been observed in this paper. Table 73 identifies the individuals and groups that received the recommenda tions from these library committees. Head librarians were the sole recipients of these recommendations on 67 O C campuses, or 83.8 percent of those institutions that distributed the recommendations to only one group or per son. This information was sent to 123 library directors,^ or 98.4 percent of those committees that sent suggestions to two or more groups or persons. Evidently, only 15 head librarians, or 7.3 percent, were missed or by-passed by the library committee in the distribution of the recommenda tions. Fifty-one library committees, or 26.3 percent, transmitted their recommendations directly to college pres idents, and/or boards of trustees without first conferring with their head librarians. 34Supra, p. 242. 3 3 The head librarian and the director of learning resources was the same person on 2 campuses but tallied under the latter title. The head librarian and director of learning resources was the same person on 1 campus but tallied under ;the latter title. 271 Table 74 EVALUATION OF THE FACULTY LIBRARY COMMITTEE Evaluation Number Percentage Outstanding 10 5.0 Very good 23 11.5 Good 77 38.5 Fair 65 32.5 Poor 25 12.5 Total 200 100.0 Evaluation of the Committee. According to Table 74, faculty library committees in public community colleges have been moderately successful in fulfilling their func tions. The work of their library committees was rated as good or better by 110 head librarians, or 55 percent. On the other hand, 25 librarians, or 12.-5 percent, considered committee performance poor. Similar replies were received from the librarians at liberal arts colleges in 1960 to Scherer's question, "How do you feel the library committee 37 at your college fulfills its role." The questions and ^Henry Howard Scherer, "Faculty-Librarian Relationships in Selected Liberal Arts Colleges," i(unpublished Ed.D. dissertation, University of Southern California, 1960), p. 55. 272 the evaluative criteria for the two investigations were similar but not identical; therefore, one cannot expect the results to be fully comparable. Scherer reported that the performance of the committee was judged above average by 119 librarians, or 66 percent, whereas 22 librarians, or 10 percent, considered their committees' performance poor. The present investigation found that 65 librarians, or 32.5 percent, gave the committee only a fair evaluation; Scherer said that 49 librarians, or 24 percent, ranked it as just average. Summary According to the information presented in this chapter, four types of committees either within the structure of the community college or outside of the formal organizational pattern were closely related to the libraries included in the study. There were such commit tees as the following: (l) Friends of the Library off- campus groups, generally composed of interested local residents, not employees of the institution, dedicated to the concept of aiding and publicizing the program and work ! of the local college library; (2 ) board of trustees' i library committees, established by and reporting to the j board on the functions, services, and programs of the library; (3) student library committees, concerned with | such paramount interests as the level and span of services ! that the individual college library provided for the students; and (4) faculty library committees, which includ ed in their memberships in various proportions such diverse elements as members of the administration, faculty, library professional staff, student body, board members, and library clerical staff. All of these committees had as their common goal better libraries with more adequate collections, improved services, and a greater awareness of a changing world and clientele. However, the first 3 were found on only a few community college campuses; the faculty library committee was dominant. Generally, the head librarians of these comprehen sive colleges were reasonably well satisfied with the composition, functions, and effectiveness of these commit tees, particularly the faculty library committee. However, it was recognized that improvements were possible in such matters as increased liaison between the faculty and the library, more active involvement of the committees in library development, clarification of the qualifications and methods of appointment of committee members, and more meaningful, improved publicity and promotion of the committee’s function, program, and accomplishments. CHAPTER IX SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS Recapitulation Purpose. The purposes of this study were to (l) examine the position of the library in the administrative and organizational structure of the American public community college, (2) study the relationship between the head librarian and the college administration, (3) deter mine the relationship between the head librarian and the faculty; (4) examine the role of the faculty in the library's administration and service; (5) discuss the advantages and disadvantages that result from the existing structures and practices; and (6 ) provide administrators, librarians, and library school faculty members with infor mation concerning the typical structures and relationships, followed by an analysis of these patterns of organization. Summary of Procedures. Participants in the study included only libraries of regionally accredited, American ; public community colleges with comprehensive educational 'programs. Such publications as American Junior Colleges. i :the Junior College Directory, and Accredited Institutions | of Higher Education were helpful in determining which i 274 colleges were suitable for inclusion in the investigation on the basis of the established parameters. A question naire was mailed to the head librarians of 467 public two- year colleges. With the assistance of the author's guidance committee and other interested and qualified librarians, the questionnaire was developed. Questions were developed in the instrument to elicit data in such areas as the following: (l) limited history of the institution; (2) the administration, organization, and structure of the library within the college; (3) the position and campus relationship of the head librarian; (4) the college committee structure, especially the faculty library com mittee; and (5) organizations, if any, that were separate from the formal committee structure. Usable returns were received from the head librar ians of 257 community colleges. The findings were then collated and tabulated. It was found that there was broad representation from the Southern, North Central, and Western regional accrediting associations. The number of respondents from the Middle States and the Northwest areas was considerably smaller. There were only a few partici pants from the New England area. Representative organiza tional charts were then identified and prepared. Summary of Findings. Inasmuch as the junior college movement grew out of thenpublic educational system, particularly secondary schools, orientation has been toward the high school rather than toward the senior college or university. Recent developments have indicated a trend toward orientation with the four-year colleges. This investigation has clearly demonstrated that the most used administrative structure has been the separate and independent junior college district. This is a distinct difference from the more common conception that the junior college is an upward local extension of the secondary school. No longer is the typical community college a small enterprise. Although every state in the nation had legislative enabling acts under which individual community or junior colleges might be established without the necessity of separate statutes of incorporation for each new college, there appeared to be some lack of understanding on the part of librarians of the laws or statutes under which specific colleges were organized. Many respondents seemed to believe that their own colleges neither had nor needed i specific statutes of incorporation if the individual i i colleges had been founded under general enabling acts. j I Apparently, a considerable number of the institutions operated without the adoption of specific by-laws. j ! The library and the head librarian were mentioned j in a few statutes of incorporation but none described the j i duties of the librarian or the objectives of the library. j There was no uncertainty concerning the lines of adminis trative authority on the part of the majority of the head librarians. The position of the library and the head librarian stood relatively high in the structure of the American public community college. On most campuses the library director had an organizational line responsibility to the academic dean or the academic vice-president of the institution. There was a general practice to place the head librarian on a relatively high level within the organizational framework of the college. He had, for example, a position comparable to that of the department/ division chairmen. Local practice, college custom, or the : institution's by-laws were the bases of the delegation of authority and responsibility. Generally, the new head librarians of community colleges were selected by the chief administrative officer,; by the chief academic officer, or by agreement between ' these two persons. A search committee to locate and select! a new library director was used by only a few institutions.: Administrators and faculty members were involved equally in' the appointment of the search committee members although j | there was no consistent pattern. Likewise, the composition! i of this committee was balanced almost equally among facultyj I members:, administrators, and librarians. There were more | ! I faculty members than administrators on the committee but j fewer librarians than either of the other groups. The j i legal appointment was made by the board of trustees and/or j ; the president of the college. i : At a large majority of the public two-year j ; colleges the head librarian reported directly to the j j | i academic dean instead of to the president; the ratio was j almost 5:1. By approximately the same ratio, the library j ; director was also organizationally responsible to the : j academic dean for library professional personnel. Gener- | | i i ally, the head librarian was responsible to either the j I academic dean or the business manager for the supervision j I of library clerical personnel. The investigation found j | I ithat library directors usually had a combination of j j i I ; administrative and faculty duties. A moderate minority ! I : were administrative officers of their institutions with no ; i ’identified faculty duties. However, less than one-eighth : i |of the head librarians were faculty members without | I administrative responsibilities. j By a ratio of more than 3:2 the directors of com munity college libraries were at institutions that had no faculty ranks. At those colleges that did grant their I faculty members academic titles by rank, an almost equal number of head librarians were distributed in each of the j four levels, with a slightly larger number on each of the two upper ranks. Generally, the level of the faculty rank was dependent upon such qualifications as the nature of the! academic degrees held and the person's seniority at the college. A significant majority, 90-97 percent, of the head librarians were accorded such benefits of faculty status as the following: (l) faculty retirement benefits, (2 ) released time and travel allowances in the form of reimbursement for attendance at professional meetings, and (3) attendance at faculty meetings and service on faculty committees. There was considerable variation throughout the nation and sometimes within the individual states in the salaries that the head librarians received. The mean salary was between those paid to an assistant professor and an associate professor. It is possible that this relative ly low salary level may have been due in part to the like lihood that the educational level of the average head librarian was lower than that of the average community college teacher. Only 15 percent of the directors of community college libraries had second master's degrees, and fewer than 3 percent held the doctorate. As would havei been expected, however, more than nine-tenths of the head librarians had met the minimum educational requirement of 1 training in librarianship, primarily the master's degree. A wide variety of titles was assigned to the j director of library services in the community colleges j although the most commonly used title was that of head ■ librarian. Head librarians were members of faculty senates on only a few of the campuses; however, they were usually j eligible for election to membership. On the other hand, they were members of faculty library committees at more than 70 percent of the colleges. A significant majority of the head librarians appeared to have a fairly knowledgeable conception of the many roles that the library should assume on the community college campus. They recognized that this multi-faceted role included such functions as these: (l) to facilitate the use of library materials by logical organization and efficient service, (2 ) to teach the use of libraries and library materials, (3) to give each student the opportunity to gain a well-rounded reading experience, and (4) to meet the full curricular needs of all students. The library directors were aware, however, that the actual fulfillment of these roles fell somewhat short of the ideal. Financial support for community college libraries by the administrations of the institutions seemed to have stabilized during recent years at an inadequate minimum of ; 5 percent of the total educational budget of the colleges. This minimum percentage had been suggested in 1960 by the j American Library Association in its Standards for Junior j j College Libraries for well-established libraries without broad curricular offerings. Since most of the institutions were multi-purpose colleges with extensive course work and library responsibility for campus audio-visual services and since almost one-half were founded during the past decade, 281 it was evident that the support percentage should be con siderably greater than the 5 percent minimum. Recently, two-year colleges have budgeted annually for library ser vices approximately $50 per full-time equivalent student. The actual amount should fluctuate according to the cost of living in the United States. Although the head librarians of American public two-year colleges often consulted other persons and/or groups on their respective campuses in the preparation of library budgets, they usually had specific and sole responsibility for the development, preparation, and presentation of the budget. The library director's high position on the college campus was further attested by the fact that the administration almost always consulted him before it made decisions or pronouncements on library services or initiated new library policies. Active parti cipation in library affairs by the administration was indicated by the broad spectrum of significant advances which had been made during the past five years in library services, facilities, and/or finances. Faculty participa- ■ tion in library affairs was possible through such avenues j as these: (l) service on the faculty library committee, j (2) evaluation of library materials for possible purchase or discard, and (3) assignment of a faculty member as a | library representative by an academic department. j | Other than the faculty library committee, few committees on college campuses concerned themselves with library matters. Friends of the Library groups and separate student library committees were found at slightly more than one-twentieth of the institutions studied. Similarly, only one-fiftieth of the boards of trustees had established special library committees with library matters as their sole or primary function. The most popular committee of this nature was the faculty library committee; these groups were found at more than 80 percent of the community colleges. Although there was considerable involvement in the examination and recommendations concern ing library regulations, the majority of head librarians viewed the work of the committee as primarily advisory and : not administrative. Liaison between the library and faculty members was a primary function of these committees. Faculty members and head librarians were on the library committees in almost equal proportions. Many of the library committees also had representation from the student body and the administration. Although on some campuses several groups were involved in the selection of committee ; members, at a majority of the institutions all members werei i i : . i appointed by either one person or group, chiefly an administrative officer of the college. An objective evalu ation of the efficiency of the committee in meeting its functions concluded that it had been only moderately | successful. 283 A majority of the community college libraries used the traditional type of functional organization. This may be a partial explanation of the observation that a large majority of the libraries administered the audio-visual services on the campuses of two-year colleges. Conclusions As the preceding summary of the findings of this investigation would suggest, identifiable improvements and some changes are needed in order to improve the libraries of the American public community colleges. Such modifica- . tions would ensure that the libraries would assume their rightful position in the structure of the government of their respective institutions, that the libraries would become viable educational entities, and that the profes sional library staff members would be afforded the opportunity to carry out their functions in the most efficient manner possible. Several conditions must be met if community college librarians are to operate at their highest potential. The I . following are suggested: (1) the place of the library in j the administrative and organizational structure of the j individual institution must be adequately documented; (2 ) !financial support by the administration must be demonstra- ! ■ I I :ted by increased library resources, staffing, and salaries;j 1(3) the head librarian must be recognized sufficiently in 284 the academic and administrative organization; (4) appropriate and capable leadership must be demonstrated by the head librarian; (5) faculty members must be given the opportunity to participate in advisory roles in library affairs; and (6) channels of communication must exist and be kept open for faculty, administration, students, and library staff members. The findings of this study support the following conclusions: 1. All American public community colleges should have by-laws available for inspection and use. These by laws should be developed within the definition of the institution's objectives and policies. Included would be detailed information concerning the duties, functions, and responsibilities of the director of the library. These data will facilitate the understanding by others of the administrative and educational nature of the head libra rian's duties. Obviously, he must be given complete , responsibility for the administration of the library. Supplementary to a detailed statement of responsibilities j j in the by-laws should be a campus organizational chart j that includes the position of the head librarian. 2. The place of the head librarian in the American public community college must be strengthened by appropri ate rank, benefits, and opportunities for involvement in academic and administrative affairs. Although the head librarian does report to the chief academic officer or the chief administrative officer of the institution, his position is usually not high in the administrative hier archy. At those colleges that have faculty rank, he should be a full professor or an associate professor. At smaller institutions, whether or not they have faculty rank, the head librarian should have the status of a department or division chairman. He should have the status of an assistant dean at colleges of moderate size. At the larger institutions he should be either a dean or an associate dean. If he is not an ex-officio member of administrative committees or other councils that are advisory to the chief administrative officer, he should be invited to sit with these groups in order to inform and to be informed of items that might affect library services and staff performance. If the status of the head librarian were improved along the lines suggested, he would be placed at an advantage in presenting the needs of a developing library program. 3. If community college libraries are expected to < fulfill their multi-faceted roles and functions adequately, library expenditures must be increased significantly. Although the average community college library is meeting i the minimum suggested by the Standards for Junior College Libraries for the size of the collection and the percentage of the institution's educational budget, the broad 286 curricular offerings of most institutions would suggest larger collections and more adequate support. In addition to the level of library service, the continued increases in the cost of books, periodicals, and other library materials would indicate a need for a significant increase in library funds. 4. American public community colleges, whenever possible, should make full use of federal and state government financial aid and gifts of money and resources from private donors as they seek to improve their libraries. Such supplementary sources of financial assist ance should not be viewed as a substitute for the support of the library by the administration of the college. There was some evidence that during the past ten years community college libraries have taken advantage of government monies, available through the Higher Education Facilities Act and the Higher Education Act of 1965. With the recent reduc tion in these funds throughout the country and with the evident hesitation of many voters to increase taxes in order to support education, local community colleges must i supplement their library budgets with help from such groups! ! as the Friends of the Library. Such additional means of support will often come to the attention of the board of trustees, the president, and others associated with the financial affairs of the institution only if there is an active and continuous campaign on the part of the head 287 librarian. He must exercise active leadership and engage in a meaningful public relations program that will overcome the lack of financial support. 5. If the library is to assume its rightful place in the academic structure of the community college, the head librarian must make certain that there is careful and long-term planning in the development of appropriate and well-balanced collections. This task can be accomplished only if adequate financial support is given to the library | for this goal and only if there is sufficient interest on the part of the faculty and the library staff. Often, the faculty library committee can give the initiative and direction for the building of the collection, currently and retrospectively, broadly and specifically. 6 . In order to provide a substantial basis for the; i adequate development of a sound and meaningful library policy within the objectives and structure of the institu- i tion, individual community colleges will have to conduct critical and systematic self-studies and comparative eval- | uations. It will be well to state in a specific document the definite purposes and function of the library within : the overall objectives of the institution. If these libraries are to function efficiently within their local situations, budgetary provisions must be intensively | analyzed, relationships examined, and detailed histories of ; the libraries made available. In this way, all those who j are interested in the library can have a readily available frame of reference within which to plan, make decisions, and access the present and future needs. 7. Inasmuch as there was an adverse differential between the salaries of head librarians and other adminis trators and teachers, the salaries of the library directors of community colleges must be improved. If a community college is to be able to recruit and hold a major academic and administrative officer who is responsible for the learning resource center of the campus, it must offer a salary for the head librarian equal to that of dean, asso ciate dean, or assistant dean, depending upon the size of the institution. This must be done even during the present situation of diminishing and inadequate finances and a surplus of qualified librarians. There is a tendency for excellent salaries to attract superior librarians. 8 . Inasmuch as faculty members’ instructional and professional success depends to a certain extent upon the adequacy of the library, they should be given ample oppor tunity to comment upon library policy. Those relatively few community colleges that do not have library committees should reconsider their committee structure. Likewise, those very few library committees that do not include as members either the head librarian or faculty members should reconsider the composition of the committee. Serious consideration should be given to the possibility that the 289 committee size should be somewhat larger than the basic size established in the literature. This would give broader departmental representation. If this larger com mittee should meet a few times a year, an executive committee could be responsible for the day-to-day activi ties and routine matters. This arrangement would give the faculty greater opportunity to keep informed concerning library matters, to identify problems, and to suggest modifications of library policies. Although the larger committee would meet only two or three times during the academic year, it would promote communication among the administration, the faculty, and the library personnel. Greater care should be taken in the selection of faculty members for the library committee. The head librarian's advice should be sought and his recommendations carefully considered. He will know which faculty members have the desirable personal qualifications and general interest in the library. However, no attempt must be made by the librarian to dominate the committee or to dictate the choice of topics that are considered. He must not fear! the innovative, albeit radical, ideas of a faculty member who is not altogether sympathetic to the existing library j programs. In order to be most effective, the committee i i must operate under specific terms of reference. Although J the library director may find it sometimes useful to have j i the committee serve administratively under clearly-defined i 290 conditions, its functions should be identified and its advisory role emphasized. 9. There should be greater opportunity for community college students to make suggestions concerning library development and service. Inasmuch as students are primary users of the library, they should serve on the library committee with the same rights and privileges as the other members of the committee. Student members of the library committee should be selected by their fellow students and should not be appointed by members of the administration, the faculty, or the library. 10. The improvement of the channels of communica tion between the library and the various groups on the campus must be given special emphasis by all available means. Clear and concise annual reports will enable all library users, including administration, faculty, and students, to be made aware of library purposes, plans, and : needs. An informed clientele can do much to help and support the head librarian and to anticipate and prevent problems. On the other hand, all concerned on the campus should make every attempt to inform the library of activi- J ties that may be of interest or may have a bearing on the j l library. j Recommendations On the basis of the results revealed in the 291 investigation and the conclusions drawn from them, certain recommendations are made with regard to further research. 1. Investigations are needed to determine the personal qualifications that are needed by the head libra rian of a public community college. What are the critical characteristics that are considered of major importance for a librarian to be successful as the director of a community college library? 2. Research that undertakes to identify the desirable academic and professional preparation of the head librarian of a community college should be conducted. Is the M.L.S. degree really important? Are there any tangible benefits from the possession of a second master's degree? Is the doctorate of value for the head librarian? 3. Studies are needed to explore the methods of selection that are considered appropriate for the head librarian. Of particular importance would be an investi gation of the special selection committee. Are better choices made by administrators, by faculty members, or by a group composed of both? 4. Research should be undertaken that seeks to j identify the administrative and faculty perceptions j ; concerning the effectiveness of the head librarian in } icarrying out his duties. I ! 5. Investigations are needed to determine the j j ! head librarian's role in bringing about change in 292 educational practices at the community college level. Does the head librarian have a meaningful influence or demons trated leverage on the campus? Should change in education al practices be initiated at the student, faculty, administrative, or library level? 6. Studies are needed to seek the head librarian's participation in the preparation of the library budget. Does the budget develop from demonstrated educational and library needs? Is the head librarian informed of what monies will be available, and does he then merely allocate the ways and places he will spend it? 7. Research that undertakes to identify technical- detail duties that can be transferred to specialized per sonnel should be conducted. Can these tasks be identified? Will their transfer from one employee to others result in a more efficient operation or an increase in staff size? Will their transfer allow professional staff more time to exchange and explore new and possibly innovative ideas with ithe faculty and time to read more thoroughly in the current literature? i j i 8 . Investigations are needed to develop a statis- \ ] I ;tical tool to determine quickly and correctly the level of ; i I -support that community college administration is giving itsi ; | library. Is the support adequate on the basis of such iparameters as the size of the student body, the breadth of !course offerings, the cost of library materials as j influenced by inflation or deflation, and the age of the institution? 9. Research that undertakes to identify the recommended type of administrative structure for individ ual libraries should be conducted. Does the size of the library staff affect the type of organization? Can several types of organizational patterns be intermingled effectively? 10. Studies are needed to determine what influ ence, if any, student activism has had upon library administration, functions, and services. Has there been a change in the types of materials being purchased? Has there been a greater involvement of students in the administration of the library? Are there more student representatives on the library committee? 11. Research should be conducted on the Library- College concept in order to determine how extensive its philosophy and influence has been to date on the American educational scene. Has its impact upon the community college movement been more apparent than real? Is its potential value greater on the junior college level than on the senior college or graduate level, or does the con cept transcend all educational levels? Should the Library-College idea affect library administration and library services in any significant manner? The evidence collected during the course of this 294 study indicates that the library assumes an important position in the organizational and administrative structure of the American public community college. Maintenance of open channels of communication between the head librarian and the college administrators is necessary for the provi sion of the highest level of library services. The establishment and continuity of a reciprocal relationship between the head librarian and members of the faculty is required if a quality library materials collection is to be developed and used. BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Accredited Institutions of Higher Education, February, 1970. Washington, D. C.: American Council on education, 1970. Adams, Harlen Martin. The Junior College Library Program: A Study of Library Services in Relation to Instructional Procedures. Chicago: American Library Association and Stanford University, California: Stanford University Press, 1940. American Academy of Political and Social Science. Methods of Financing Higher Education. Philadelphia: The Academy, 1955. American Council on Education. American Junior Colleges. Eighth Edition. Washington, D. C.: The Council, 1971. American Council on Education. American Junior Colleges. Seventh Edition. Washington, D. C.: The Council, 1967. American Library Association. Personnel Publications Committee. Personnel Organization and Procedure: A Manual Suggested for Use in College and University Libraries. Second Edition. Chicago: American Library Association, 1968. Ayers, Archie Raymond and Russel, John Hamilton. Internal Structure: Organization and Administration of Institutions of Higher Education. Washington, D. C.: Government Printing Office, 1962. Benjamin, Harold. Democracy in the Administration of Higher Education. 10th Yearbook of the John Dewey Society. New York: Harper & Bros., 1950. Bestor, Arthur. The Restoration of Learning: A Program for Redeeming the Unfulfilled Promise of American Education. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1956. 296 297 Bigelow, Karl Worth (ed.). Selected Books for the College and University Administrator. New York: Columbia University, Teachers College, Bureau of Publications, 1958. Biggs, Martha. Codifying College Library Policy. (Occasional Paper No. 14.) Urbana: University of Illinois, Library School, 1950. Blackwell, Thomas Edward. College and University Administration. New York: The Center for Applied Research in Education, 1966. Blau, Peter Michael and Scott, W. Richard. Formal Organizations; A Comparative Approach. San Francisco: Chandler Publishing Co., 1962. Blocker, Clyde E. Administrative Practices in University Extension Centers and Branch Colleges. Austin: University of Texas, 1963. ________ . Attitudes of Administrators toward the Administrative Organization of Public Junior Colleges in 7 States. Austin: University of Texas, 1962. Blocker, Clyde E., Plummer, Robert H., and Richardson, Richard C., Jr. The Two-Year College: A Social Synthesis. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1965. Boss, Richard D. and Anderson, Roberta. Communitv/Junior College; A Bibliography. New Edition. Corvallis, Oregon: Division of Continuing Education of the Oregon State System of Higher Education, 1967. Bowker Annual of Library and Book Trade Information. New York: R. R. Bowker Co., 1969. Boynton, Edwin Currey. A Critical Analysis of Administrative Staffing Needs of Junior Colleges. Austin: University of Texas, 1959. Branscomb, Harvie. Teaching with Books; A Study of Colleg< Libraries. Handen, Connecticut: Shoe String Press, 1964 (cl940). 298 Branscomb, Lewis Capers (ed.). The Case for Faculty Status for Academic Librarians. (Association of College and Research Libraries Monograph No. 33.) Chicago: American Library Association, 1970. Brick, Michael. Forum and Focus for the Junior College Movement. New York: Columbia University, Teachers College, Bureau of Publications, 1964. Brough, Kenneth J. Scholar’s Workshop; Evaluating Conceptions of Library Service. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1953. Brumbaugh, Aaron John. Problems in College Administration. Nashville, Tennessee: The Methodist Church, Board of Education, 1956. Burns, Gerald P. (ed.). Administrators in Higher Education: Their Functions and Coordination. New York: Harper & Bros., 1962. Campbell, Roald Fry and Gregg, Russell Taaffe (eds.). Administrative Behavior in Education. New York: Harper & Bros., 1957. Carpenter, William Weston. The Organization and Administration of the Junior College. Columbia, Missouri: Lucas Bros., 1939. Clark, Burton R. The Open Door College: A Case Study. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1960. Cohen, Arthur M. Dateline *79: Heretical Concepts for the! Community College. Beverly Hills, California: Glencoe Press, 1969. Corson, John Jay. Governance of Colleges and Universities. ; New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1960. i } Deferrari, Roy Joseph (ed.). College Organization and j Administration. Washington, D. C.: Catholic j University of America, 1947. | i j ________. The Problems of Administration in the American j College. Proceedings of the Workshop at the j Catholic University of America, June 10-21, 1955. j Washington, D. C.: Catholic University of America : Press, 1956. j Donovan, George Francis (ed.). Selected Problems in Administration of American Higher Education. Proceedings of the Workshop at the Catholic University of America, 1963. Washington, D. C.: Catholic University of America Press, 1964. Downs, Robert Bingham. The Status of American College and University Librarians. (Association of College and Research Libraries Monograph No. 22.) Chicago: American Library Association, 1958. Establishing Legal Bases for Community Colleges. Washington, D. C.: American Association of Junior Colleges, 1962. Fields, Ralph R. The Community College Movement. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1962. Fretwell, Elbert K., Jr. Founding Junior Colleges: Local Initiative in Six Communities. New York: Columbia i University, Teachers College, Bureau of Publications, 1954. Fussier, Herman (ed.). The Function of the Library in the I Modern College. Chicago: University of Chicago, Graduate Library School, 1954. Gleazer, Edmund J., Jr. This is the Community College. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1968. Griffiths, Daniel Edward. Administrative Theory. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 1959. Hagman, Harlan L. and Schwartz, Alfred. Administration in : Profile for School Executives. New York: Harper &i Bros., 1955. j j Harlacher, Ervin L. The Community Dimension of the j Community College. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1969. Henderson, Algo Donmyer. Policies and Practices in Higher Education. New York: Harper & Bros., 1960. Henry, Nelson Bollinger (ed.). The Public Junior College. 55th Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education. Chicago: The Society, 1956. 300 Hillway, Tyrus. The American Two-Year College. New York: Harper & Bros., 1958. Hostrop, Richard W. Teaching and the Community College Library. Hamden, Connecticut: Shoe String Press, 1968. Hughes, Raymond Mollyneaux. A Manual for Trustees. Third Edition. Ames, Iowa: Collegiate Press, 1961. Hungate, Thad Lewis. Finance in Educational Manqement of Colleges and Universities. New York: Columbia University, Teachers College, Bureau of Publications, 1954. ________. Management in Higher Education. New York: Columbia University, Teachers College, Bureau of Publications, 1964. Johnson, Bryon Lamar. General Education in Action: A Report of the California Study of General Education in the Junior College. Washington, D. C. : American Council on Education, 1952. ________. Islands of Innovation Expanding: Changes in the Community College. Beverly Hills, California: Glencoe Press, 1969. Johnson, Bryon Lamar (ed.). The Junior College Library. (UCLA Junior College Leadership Program Occasional Report No. 8 .) Los Angeles: University of California, School of Education, 1966. ________. Vitalizing a College Library. Chicago: American Library Association, 1939. Junior College Directory. Washington, D. C. : American Association of Junior Colleges, 1969. Kansas. Legislative Council. Advisory Committee on j Junior Colleges. Community Junior Colleges: A Report. Relating to the Role. Function. Organization. Financing, and Supervision of Junior i Colleges, on Proposal No. 2. Topeka: Kansas Legislative Council, Research Department, 1964. j 301 Knowles, Asa Smallidge (ed.)* Handbook of College and University Administration. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1970. 2 vols. Lyle, Guy Redvers. The Administration of the College Library. Third Edition. H. W. Wilson Co., 1961. ________ . The President, the Professor and the College Library. New York: H. W. Wilson Co., 1963. McVey, Frank LeRond and Hughes, Raymond Mollyneaux. Problems of College and University Administration. Ames, Iowa: State College Press, 1952. Marshall, John David (ed.). Of. by and for Librarians: Further Contributions to Library Literature. (Contribution No. 2.) Hamden, Connecticut: Shoe String Press, 1960. Massman, Virgil Frank. Faculty Status for Librarians. Metuchen, New Jersey: Scarecrow Press, 1972. Medsker, Leland L. The Junior College: Progress and Prospect. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1960. Millett, John David. The Academic Community: An Essay on Organization. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1960. ________ . Financing Higher Education in the United States. ; New York: Columbia University Press, 1952. ________ . Management in the Public Service: The Quest for Effective Performance. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1954. Monroe, Charles R. Profile of the Community College. San 8 Francisco: Jossey-Bass, Inc., 1972. | Moore, Everett LeRoy (ed.). Junior College Libraries: Development. Needs, and Perspectives. (Association of College and Research Libraries Monograph No. 30.) Chicago: American Library Association, 1969. 302 Morphet, Edgar Leroy, Johns, Roe L., and Reller, Theodore L. Educational Administration: Concepts, Practices, and Issues. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1959. _________. Educational Organization and Administration: Concepts« Practices. and Issues. Second Edition. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1967. Morrison, Duncan Grant. The 2-Year Community College: An Annotated List of Studies and Surveys. (Bulletin 1958; No. 14.) Washington, D. C.: U. S. Office of Education, 1958. O’Connell, Thomas E. Community Colleges: A President's View. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1968. Perkins, John Alanson. Plain Talks from a College Campus. Newark: University of Delaware Press, 1959. Pfiffner, John McDonald and Sherwood, Frank P. Administrative Organization. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1960. Organization— the Study of Hierarchy. Los Angeles: University of Southern California Bookstore, 1959. Price, Hugh G. California Public Junior Colleges. Sacramento: California State Department of Education, 1958. Proctor, William Martin (ed.). The Junior College: Its Organization and Administration. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press, 1927. Randall, William Madison and Goodrich, Francis. Principles of College Library Administration. Second Edition. Chicago: American Library Association and University of Chicago Press, 1941. Read, Betty. The Community-Junior College. Albuquerque, New Mexico: The Future Schools Study Project, Albuquerque Public Schools, 1969. 303 Reynolds, James Walton. The Junior College. New York: Center for Applied Research in Education, 1965. Rogers, Rutherford David and Weber, David Carter. University Library Administration. New York: H. W. Wilson Co., 1971. Rutgers University. Graduate School of Library Science. Studies in Library Administrative Problems: Eight Reports from a Seminar in Library Administration. (Directed by Keyes D. Metcalf.) New Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers University Press, 1960. Sammartino, Peter. Community College in Action. Rutherford, New Jersey: Fairleigh Dickinson College Press, 1950. Schiller, Anita R. Characteristics of Professional Personnel in College and University Libraries. Springfield: Illinois State Library, 1969. Sheehan, Helen Beebe. The Small College Library. Revised Edition. Washington and Cleveland: Corpus Books, 1969. Shores, Louis. Library-Colleqe USA: Essays on a proto type for an American Higher Education. Tallahassee, Florida: South Pass Press, 1970. Simon, Herbert Alexander. Administrative Behavior. Second Edition. New York: Macmillan, 1957. Smith, Denison Langley and Baxter, Eric George. College Library Administration in Colleges of Technology. Art. Commerce, and Further Education. London: Oxford University Press, 1965. Smith, Huston. The Purposes of Higher Education. New York: Harper & Bros., 1955. Starrak, James Abel and Hughes, Raymond Mollyneaux. The Community College in the United States. Ames, Iowa: State College Press, 1954. Thompson, James. An Introduction to University Library Administration. Hamden, Connecticut: Archon Books, 1970. 304j Thorton, James W. The Community Junior College. Second ! Edition. New Yorks John Wiley & Sons, Inc., j 1972. ! I United States Office of Education. Education Directory. j 1969-1970: Higher Education. Washington, C. C.: ! Government Printing Office, 1970. j ________. Library Statistics of Colleges and Universities. 1963-1969. Washington, D. C.s Government Printing! Office, 1965-1969. ! j i Waldo, Dwight. The Study of Public Administration. New York: Random House, 1955. | Webster, Noah. Webster's Third New International Dictionary of the English Language. Springfield, | Massachusetts: G. and C. Merriam Co., 1963. j Wheeler, Helen Rippier. The Community College Library: A j Plan for Action. Hamden, Connecticut: Shoe String Press, 1965. j i Wilson, Louis Round, Metcalf, Keyes D., and Coney, Donald, j A Report of Certain Problems of the Libraries and j School of Library Service of Columbia University. | New York: Columbia University Libraries, 1947. Wilson, Louis Round and Tauber, Maurice Falcolm. The j University Library: The Organization. j Administration, and Functions of Academic Libraries. Second Edition. New York: Columbia University Press, 1956. Woodburne, Lloyd Stuart. Principles of College and University Administration. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press, 1958. Yarrington, Roger. Junior Colleges: 50 States/50 Years. Washington, D. C.: American Association of Junior Colleges, 1969. Articles and Periodicals Almy, Patty. "Background and Development of the Junior College Library." Library Trends. XIV (October, 1965), 123-31. American Association of Junior Colleges. Commission on Legislation. "A Guide to State Legislation for Community Colleges," in Establishing Bases for Community Colleges. Washington, D. C. : American Association of Junior Colleges, 1962. pp. 29-31. American Association of Junior Colleges and Association of College and Research Libraries. "AAJC-ACRL Guidelines for Two-Year College Library Learning Resource Centers," College and Research Libraries News. XXXII (October, 1971), 265-78. American Library Association. Association of College and Research Libraries. Committee on Standards. "Standards for College Libraries," College and Research Libraries. XX (July, 1959), 274-80. ________. "Standards for Junior College Libraries," College and Research Libraries, XXI (May, I960), 200-6. Association of College and Research Libraries. Academic Status Committee. "ACRL Academic Status Committee Proposes Standards for Librarians," College and Research Libraries News. XXXI (October, 1970), 269-72. Bartky, John. "The Nature of Junior College Administration," Junior College Journal. XXVIII (September, 1957), 3-7. Benjamin, Philip Mohr. "The Relation Between the Librarian and the College Administration," College and Research Libraries. XVI (October, 1955), 350- 352; 359. Bergen, Daniel Patrick. "The Anthropocentric Needs of Academic Librarianship," College and Research Libraries. XXIV (July, 1963), 277-90; 307-8. ! 306 i t I Bergen, Daniel Patrick. "The Anthropocentric Needs of Academic Enterprise," College and Research j Libraries, XXIV (November, 1963), 467-80. !_______ . "Socio-Psychological Research on College Environments," College and Research Libraries. | XXIII (November, 1962), 473-81. ;Bogue, Jesse Parker. "The Development of Junior Colleges," in American Junior Colleges. Fifth Edition. | Washington, D. C.: American Council on Education, i 1960. pp. 8-13. jBogue, Jesse Parker and Burns, Norman. "Legal and Extra- legal Influences for Improving Junior Colleges," in I The Public Junior College. Edited by Nelson B. ; Henry. Chicago: National Society for the Study of Education, 1956. pp. 232-46. Buck, Paul. "A New Personnel Program for Harvard Librarians," Harvard Library Bulletin. XII (Autumn,! 1958), 292. ! I * ! j !Burg, Karl 0. "Governing Authorities of Today," Library I i Trends. VII (January, 1959), 378-87. j ; i Cain, Stith. "The Library Committee: Asset or Liability,"; j Association of American Colleges Bulletin. XXXVIII ! (December, 1952), 507-12. j iCaldwell, John. "Degrees Held by Head Librarians of j Colleges and Universities," College and Research Libraries, XXIII (May, 1962), 227-8. J iCarlson, William Hugh. "The Trend toward Academic J Recognition of College Librarians," College and j Research Libraries. XVI (January, 1955), 24-29. Carty, Jackson Calloway. "Survey of Administrative j Standing of Head librarians in Two-Year Colleges of ! California," Junior College Journal. XXIX (April, | 1959), 490-92. i ■Coles, James S. "A College President and the Standards for College Libraries," College and Research | Libraries. XXII (July, 1961), 267-70; 296. 307; Coney, Donald. "Management in College and University j Libraries," Library Trends. I (July, 1952), 83-94. Cowley, William H. "Academic Management," Educational Forum. XV (January, 1951), 217-29. j | ________ . "The Government and Administration of Higher Education: Whence and Whither," Journal of j American Association of College Registrars. XXII (July, 1947), 483. I Cox, Ronald W. "Junior College District Organization," California Education. Ill (January, 1966), 29-30. Davison, Robert 0. "College Organization and j Administration: Some Faculty Views," in American j Association of Junior Colleges. Selected Papers. 47th Annual Convention, February 27 - March 3, i 1967. Washington, D. C.: American Association of ; Junior Colleges, 1967. pp. 26-28. j | Day, Edmund E. "Role of Administration in Higher j Education," Journal of Higher Education. XVII j (October, 1946), 339-43. De Los Santos, Alfredo G., Jr. "Chief Librarians of the j Public Junior Colleges of Texas, 1957," Texas j Library Journal. XXXV (March, 1959), 25-27. | j Dix, William Shepherd. "Leadership in Academic Libraries,"! College and Research Libraries. XXI (September, j 1960), 373-80; 388. j Downs, Robert Bingham. "Current Status of University Library Staff," College and Research Libraries. XVIII (September, 1957), 381. Downs, Robert Bingham (ed.). "Current Trends in College and University Libraries," Library Trends. I (July, 1952), all. ________. "The Place of Libraries in Colleges and Universities," North Carolina Libraries, XVIII (Winter, 1960), 34-41. Downs, Robert Bingham (ed.). "Some Current Aspects of College and University Library Administration," Southeastern Librarian. X (Summer, 1960), 63-69. !________. "Status of University Libraries - 1964," College and Research Libraries. XXV (July, 1964), 253-58. Eurich, Alvin C. "Higher Education in the 21st Century," Atlantic Monthly. CCXI (June, 1963), 51-55. :"Faculty Participation in College and University Government," AAUP Bulletin. XLVI (Summer, 1960), 203. iForgotson, Jane. "A Staff Librarian Views the Problem of Status," College and Research Libraries. XXII (July, 1961), 275-81; 306. ! !Frarey, Carlyle J. "Placement & Salaries: The 1969 Plateau," Library Journal. XCV (June 1, 1970), ! 2103. Frarey, Caryle James and Donley, Mary R. "Placements & Salaries, 1970: The Year That Was Not What It Seemed," Library Journal. XCVI (June 1, 1971), 1937-41. Friley, Charles Edwin. "College Library Control," ALA Bulletin. XXIX (February, 1935), 67-72. Fussier, Herman. "Some Problems in College Librarianship Library Quarterly. XXIV (October, 1954), 387-88. Gelfand, Morris Arthur. "College Librarian in the Academic Community," College and Research Libraries. X (April, 1949), 129-34; 139. j_______ . "Creating Personnel Policies to Attract and Retain Librarians," Educational Record. XLI (July 1960), 235-39. Gleazer, Edmund J., Jr. "The Stake of the Junior College in Its Library," College and Research Libraries. XXVII (July, 1966), 263-66. 309 Gorschels, Clarence. "Of New Libraries and Futuristic Libraries," College and Research Libraries. XXV (July, 1964), 267-8; 284. Griffith, Alice Groombridge. "Organization and Administration of the Junior College Library," Library Trends. XVI (October, 1965), 132-44. Griffiths, Daniel Edward. "Toward a Theory of Administrative Behavior," in Administrative Behavior in Education. Edited by Roald F. Campbell and Russell T. Gregg. New Yorks Harper & Bros, 1957. pp. 354-90. Grove, Pearce S. "Library Support in Institutions of Higher Education in Illinois," Illinois Libraries. XLIII (November, 1961), 639-52. Hall, George L. "Confusion in the Control Of the Junior College," Junior College Journal. XXXII (April, 1962), 432-36. Hand, Harold C. "Practices in Determining Institutional Objectives," in Democracy in the Administration of Higher Education. Edited by Harold Benjamin. (10th Yearbook of the John Dewey Society.) New York: Harper & Bros., 1950. pp. 103-4. Harbold, William H. "Policy Making and Control in College and University Libraries," in College, University and Special Libraries of the Pacific Northwest. Edited by Morton Kroll. (Pacific Northwest Library Association, Library Development Project Reports, No. 3.). Seattle; University of Washington Press, 1961. pp. 9-58. Harlow, Neal Rotan. "Improving Faculty-Library Relations: The Administrator's View," PNLA Quarterly. XXI (October, 1956), 24-26. ________ . "Levels of Need for Library Service in Academic Institutions," College and Research Libraries. XXIV (September, 1963), 359-64. Harvey, John Frederick. "The Role of the Junior College Library," College and Research Libraries. XXVII (May, 1966), 227-32. 310! Harvey, John Frederick. "The Role of the Junior College Library in Classroom Instruction," Junior College Journal, XXXII (April, 1962), 441-47. Hausdorfer, Walter. "Guidance for Administrators," Library Trends. VII (January, 1959), 481-87. Heiliger, Edward Martin. "Administration of Small Libraries," Library Trends. VII (January, 1959), 465-71. Hirsch, Felix Edward. "Community College Library," New Jersey Library Association News (March, 1964), 17. ________. "New College Library Standards," in Better Libraries Make Better Schools. Edited by Charles L. Trinkner. Hamden, Connecticut: Shoe String Press, 1962. pp. 78-82. ________. "New Horizons for Junior College Libraries," in Better Libraries Make Better Schools. Edited by Charles L. Trinkner. Hamden, Connecticut: Shoe String Press, 1962. pp. 73-78. Holley, Edward Gallon. "Effective Librarian-Faculty Relationships," Illinois Libraries. XLIII (December, 1961), 731-41. Horn, Francis H. "The Organization of Colleges and Universities," in Administrators in Higher Education. Edited by Gerald P. Burns. New York: Harper & Bros., 1962. pp. 45-78. Johnson, Byron Lamar. "The Junior College Library— An Opportunity for the Administrator," College and Research Libraries. XIII (April, 1962), 126-30. Jones, Howard. "College Organization and Administration: Some Faculty Views," in American Association of Junior Colleges. Selected Papers. 47th Annual Convention, February 27 - March 3, 1967. Washington, D. C.: American Association of Junior Colleges, 1967. pp. 21-23. Kenney, Louis Augustine. "Public Relations in the College Library," College and Research Libraries. XXV (July, 1964), 263-65. 311] Kilpela, Raymond. "The Administrative Structure of the i University Library,1 ' College and Research j Libraries. XXIX (November, 1968), 511-16. | ________ . "The University Library Committee," College and ] Research Libraries. XXIX (March, 1968), 141-43. ! Knapp, Patricia Bryan. "The College Librarian: Sociology of a Professional Specialization," in The Status of American College and University Librarians. ! Edited by Robert B. Downs. (Association of Collegej and Research Libraries Monograph No. 55.) j Chicago: American Library Association, 1958. ; pp. 56-65. I Koltai, Leslie and Thurston, Alice S. "The Community Colleges," in American Junior Colleges. Eighth i Edition. Washington, D. C.: American Council on ] Education, 1971. j i Korn, Charles. "College Organization and Administration: Some Faculty Views," in American Association of j Junior Colleges. Selected Papers. 47th Annual j Convention, February 27 - March 3, 1967. j Washington, D. C.: American Association of Junior Colleges, 1967. pp. 24-25. j Laffin, Charles W. "Library in the Two-Year Colleges," j Drexel Library Quarterly. XII (July, 1966), 224-26.] Lane, Irving E. "An Administrator Looks at the Library," in Better Libraries Make Better Schools. Edited j by Charles L. Trinkner. Hamden, Connecticut: Shoe String Press, 1962. pp. 57-61. ; i Legge, Christopher Augustus Sackville. "Policies and ] Programs of a Small College Library," Junior College Journal. XXIX (March, 1959), 412-13. Lundy, Frank Arthur. "Faculty Rank of Professional Librarians," Pt. I, College and Research Libraries. XII (January, 1951), 11-19; Pt. II, College and Research Libraries, XII (April, 1951), 109-22. Lyle, Guy Redvers. "Administrative Relationships to the Library," North Carolina Libraries. XX (Winter, 1962), 35-40. 312; McAnally, Arthur Monroe. "Privileges and Obligations of Academic Status," College and Research Libraries. XXIV (March, 1963), 102-8. McCarthy, Stephen Anthony. "Advisory Committee or j Administrative Board," Library Quarterly. XXII (July, 1952), 223-31. ________ . "Financial Support of College and University Libraries," Library Trends. I (July, 1952), 105-22.j | McDiarmid, Errett Weir. "Current Concepts in Library i Administration," Library Trends. VII (January, i 1959), 346-56. j Maier, Joan M. "Analyzing Acquisitions and Cataloging Costs," Library Resources & Technical Services. &III (Winter, 1969), 127-36. I Mapp, Edward. "The Library in a Community College," j College and Research Libraries. XIX (May, 1958), j 194-6. j Marsee, Stuart E. "Line of Responsibility - An j Administrative Necessity," Junior College Journal j XXXII (October, 1961), 84-85. j Medsker, Leland L. "Patterns for the Control of Community i Colleges," in Establishing Legal Bases for j Community Colleges. Washington, D. C.: American Association of Junior Colleges, 1962. pp. 14-18. j i Millett, John David. "Working Concepts of Organizations," ; in Elements of Public Administration. Edited by j Fritz Morstein Marx. New York: Prentice-Hall, i 1946. Moody, Robert E. "Our Academic Library Leadership: From the Faculty," College and Research Libraries. XXI (September, 1960), 362-68. Mumford, James Kenneth. "The Functions of Faculty Committees," College and University. XXVII (October, 1951), 79-84. '313, t Mumford, Lawrence Quincy and Rogers, Rutherford David. ! "Library Administration in Its Current Develop- j ment," Library Trends. VII (January, 1959), 357-67. Negherbon, Vincent Robert. "Faculty Rank and Faculty Status among Librarians," Catholic Library World. XXXV (May-June, 1964), 551-53. i I Orr, Robert W. "Public Relations for College and j University Libraries," Library Trends.•I (July, ! 1952), 123-35. j j Parker, Wyman West. "College Library Personnel," Library ! Quarterly. XXIV (October, 1954), 348-57. j Perreault, Jean M. "What Is 'Academic Status1?" College and Research Libraries. XXVII (May, 1966), 207-10. "Price Indexes for 1971," Library Journal. XCVI (July, j 1971), 2271-72. j Reece, Ernest J. (ed.). "Current Trends in Library Administration," Library Trends. VII (January, | 1959), all. | Richards, James H. "Academic Budgets and Their j Administration - 1962," Library Trends. XI (April, ! 1963), 415-26. j | Rider, Fremont. "Library Cost Accounting," Library j Quarterly. VI (October, 1936), 331-81. ! "Rising Costs and the Public Institutions: The Annual j Report on the Economic Status of the Profession, 1969-70," AAUP Bulletin. LVI (June, 1970), 174-239.! ! Robinson, Lowell. "The Role of the College Librarian," Improving College and University Teaching. X (Spring, 1962), 72-73. Russel, John Hamilton and Ayer, Archie Raymond. "Patterns of Administration," Junior College Journal. XXXIII (May, 1963), 5-7. 314! Russell, John Dale. "Changing Patterns of Administrative Organization in Higher Education," Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences, j CCCI (September, 1955), 22-31. ________. "The College Library as Viewed by the ! Administrator," Library Journal. LX (February 1, 1935), 89-93. ________. "Professional Education for Librarianship," j Library Quarterly. XII (October, 1942), 775-80. Schiller, Anita R. "Academic Librarians' Salaries," College and Research Libraries. XXX (March, 1969), 101-11. | Schwartz, Bert. "The Burgeoning Community College: Is It i Really Higher Education," Saturday Review. XLVII (December 19, 1964), 52-54; 64. Scott, W. Wiley. "The Library's Place in the Junior j College," Library Trends. XIV (October, 1965), 183-90. Seibert, Russell H. "Status and Responsibilities of Academic Librarians," College and Research Libraries. XXII (July, 1961), 253-55. Shepard, Elizabeth. "Junior College Library Trends," North Carolina Libraries. XIV (June, 1956), 134-36.j Shores, Louis. "The Junior College Impact on Academic Librarianship," College and Research Libraries. XXX (May, 1969), 214-21. i ________. "Library Centered Junior Colleges," North Carolina Libraries. XXIII (Fall, 1964), 8-13. i ________. "Library Junior College," Junior College | Journal, XXXVI (March, 1966), 6-9. I Simpson, Richard L. "Vertical and Horizontal Communication in Formal Organizations," Administrative Science Quarterly. IV (September, | 1959), 188-97. j I Spalding, Willard B. "Democracy and Efficiency in Institutional Organization and Administration," in Current Issues in Higher Education. 1950. Washington, D. C.: National Education Association, Department of Higher Education, 1951. pp. 191-96. I Stone, Elizabeth 0. "The Annual Report of the College j Librarian," School and Society. LXV (June 28, j 1947), 469-72. j ; i Tanis, Norman Earl. "Profiles of Practice in the Public i Junior College Library," College and Research ! Libraries, XXVIII (September, 1967), 331-36. ;_______ . "Strengthening the College Library," Drexel j Library Quarterly. XII (July, 1966), 276-91. j j i i ! ! Tauber, Maurice Falcolm. "Management Improvements in i | Libraries," College and Research Libraries. XV | ! (April, 1954), 188-204. j | j 1 Taylor, Morris F. and Dick, Herbert W. "More about 'The Nature of Junior College Administration1," Junior College Journal. XXVIII (December, 1957), 220-22. | ; Temple, Phillips. "The College Library," in College Organization and Administration. Edited by Roy J. j Deferrari. Washington, D. C.: Catholic University! of America, 1947. pp. 263-81. ' ! ; ! ' "Ten Point Program Outlined for Junior College Libraries," j Library Journal. XCI (March 15, 1966), 1377-1380. Thornton, James W., Jr. "The Library in the Junior College," Florida Libraries. IX (June, 1958), 8-9. ! i Trinkner, Charles L. (ed;)* "Junior College Libraries," | Library Trends. XIV (October, 1965), 119-220. j Underwood, David L. "College Organiation and Administrations Some Faculty Views," in American ; Association of Junior Colleges. Selected Papers. I 47th Annual Convention, February 27 - March 3, 1967. Washington, D. C.: American Association of Junior Colleges, 1967. pp. 19-20. 316 Veit, Fritz. "Personnel for Junior College Libraries," Library Trends. XIV (October, 1965), 145-55. ________ . "Status of the Librarian According to Accrediting Standards of Regional and Professional Associations," College and Research Libraries. XXI (March, I960), 127-35. Visser, John E. "An Experiment in Administrative Reorganization," Junior College Journal. XXXII (September, 1961), 447-52. Waller, Theodore. "A Publisher's View of College Library Opportunities," College and Research Libraries. XXI (September, 1960), 389-92. Wasserman, Paul. "Development of Administration in Library Service: Current Status and Future Prospects," College and Research Libraries. XIX (July, 1958), 283-94. Wetzler, Wilson F. "Administrative and Organizational Patterns for the Community Colleges," Junior College Journal. XXVIII (April, 1958), 430-34. White, Ruth Williams. "The Role of the Community College Library," Junior College Journal. XXXIII (October, 1962), 109-11. Willging, Eugene P. "Some Aspects of College Library Administration," in Catholic University of America. Workshop on Problems of Administration in the American College, 1955. The Problems of Administration in the American College. June 10-21, 1955. Edited by Roy J. Deferrari. Washington, D. C.: Catholic University of America Press, 1956. pp. 123-39. Wilson, Eugene Holt. "Future of Library Administration," Library Trends, VII (January, 1959), 472-80. ________. "Government and Control of the College Library," Library Quarterly. XXIV (October, 1954), 296-310. Also in The Function of the Library in the Modern College. Edited by Herman H. Fussier. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1954. pp. 22-36. 317| Wilson, Louis Round. "The Role of the Library in Higher Education," in The Inauguration of Oliver C. Carmichael as Chancellor . . . Vanderbilt University. Nashville, Tennessee: Vanderbilt University, 1938. pp. 58-9. Wriston, Henry M. "College and University Libraries," in The Library of Tomorrow; A Symposium. Edited by Emily Miller Danton. Chicago; American Library Association, 1939. pp. 142-51. Wynar, Don. "Cost Analysis in a Technical Services Division," Library Resources- & Technical Services. VII (Fall, 1963), 312-26. Unpublished Material Bramwell, Ann L. "Current Trends in Junior College Libraries." Unpublished M.L.S. thesis, University of Mississippi, 1967. Burnette, Horace Jimmie. "An Analysis of the Internal | Organizational Structures of Selected Public Junior! Colleges in Florida." Unpublished Ed.D. j dissertation, University of Florida, 1966. De Los Santos, Alfredo G., Jr. "Chief Librarians of the j Public Junior Colleges in Texas, 1957." Unpublish-I ed M.L.S. thesis, University of Texas, 1959. I Donahue, Elbert Brantley. "The Control and Support of j Public Junior Colleges in the United States." Unpublished Ed.D. dissertation, University of ! Missouri, 1941. Dubois, Paul Zinkhan. "Aspects of Administration in the Academic Library." Unpublished M.A. thesis, Kent State University, 1960. Durham, Mary Joines. "Study of Junior College Libraries in Georgia.1 - * Unpublished M.A. thesis, Tallahassee, Florida State University, 1959. 318; Eisenbise, Merlin Edwin. "Administrative Organizations and; Operational Patterns in Junior Colleges of j California." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, i University of Connecticut, 1963. j i Johnshoy, Howard Georg. "The Government and Administration of Institutions of Higher Education." Unpublished Ed.D. project report, Columbia University, Teachers College, 1951. Jones, Robert Corwin. "The Administrative Relationships of; the Library and the Junior College." Unpublished j Ed.D. dissertation, University of Denver, 1958. j Kientzle, Elizabeth. "A Study of Relationships among j College and University Administrators, Library j Committees and Librarians." Unpublished M.A. I Thesis, University of Chicago, 1949. | Krenitsky, Michael V. "Study of Junior College Libraries in Texas." Unpublished M.A. thesis, Southern j Methodist University, 1954. j i LaVire, Willis A. "The Critical Tasks for Public Junior ! College Administrators." Unpublished Ed.D. i dissertation, University of Florida, 1961. i Pax, Robert William. "An Analysis of Junior College Administrative Organizations." Unpublished Ed.D. dissertation, University of Southern California, 1963. i ! i Peeler, Elizabeth Hastings. "Functions and Duties of j Faculty Library Committees in Colleges." j Unpublished M.L.S. thesis, Columbia University, School of Library Service, 1950. Schaff, Samuel D. "Administrative Communication to Faculty and Students in an American College." Unpublished Ed.D. project, Columbia University, Teachers College, 1955. Scherer, Henry Howard. "Faculty-Librarian Relationships in Selected Liberal Arts Colleges." Unpublished Ed.D. dissertation, University of Southern California, 1960. Skrabak, Clement S. "Faculty-Library Relationships in Ten California Public Junior Colleges." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Berkeley, University of California, 1953. Waddle, Richard Leo. "The Role of the Library in the Community College with Particular Reference to the State of Washington." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Washington State University, 1967. Wetzler, Wilson Frederick. "A Survey of the Philosophical, Administrative, and Organizational Practices and Relationships of Twenty-One Publically Controlled Texas Junior Colleges to Secondary Education." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Texas, 1943. Wheeler, Helen Rippier. "The Community College Library; An Appraisal of Current Practice." Unpublished Ed.D. project, Columbia University, Teachers College, 1964. Wise, Harriet A. "A Study of the Treatment of the College Library in General Books on College Administration." Unpublished M.A. thesis, Western Reserve University, School of Library Service, 1949. APPENDIX A REPRESENTATIVE ENABLING ACT FOR CREATION OF JUNIOR COLLEGE DISTRICTS 320 APPENDIX D1 Exhibit of a State Law to Provide for the Formation of Junior C ollege Districts General Enabling Act, State of Missouri, 1961 TRULY AGREED TO AND FINALLY FASSED] SENATE COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE FOR SENATE BILL NO. 7 7 1 S T GENERAL ASSEM BLY To provide for the formation of junior college districts and to es tablish the powers and duties of the state board of education w ith respect thereto. Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Missouri, as follows: Section 1. A junior college district may be established. 2 In any public school district, or in any two or more contiguous 3 public school districts in this state, w hether in the same county 4 or not, the qualified voters resident therein m ay organize a 5 junior college district in the m anner hereinafter provided. 6 Prior to the organization of any such district under this act, 7 the state board of education shall establish standards for the 8 organization of any such district which shall include among 9 other things: 10 (1) W hether a junior college is needed in the proposed 11 district; • ^Establishing Legal Bases for Community Colleges (Washington, * D. C.: American Association of Junior Colleges, 1962), pp. 33-43. | 23 School D istricts o f ............................................ state of Missouri, 24 a junior college district for the offering of 13th and 14th year 25 courses, to be known os the Junior College D istrict o f ........... 26 ........................... Missouri, having the power to impose a 27 property tax not to exceed the annual rate o f cents on 28 the one hundred dollars assessed valuation of taxable prop* 29 erty w ithout voter approval and such additional taxes as 30 may be approved by vote thereon, as prayed in petition filed •31 w ith the state Board of Education at Jefferson City, Missouri, 32 on t h e day o f ...............................,1 9 ...? 33 For org an izatio n............................................. 34 ' Against o rg an izatio n .................................... 35 The election shall be conducted in the m anner provided under 36 the school law. W ithin fifteen days after such election, the re- 37 suits shall be transm itted by those receiving the same under 38 law in each component district to the state board of education, 39 by certificates attesting to the total num ber of votes cast within 40 each such district on said proposition, the votes cast for and 41 against said proposition and the votes cast for each candidate 42 for trustee, together w ith the tally sheets attested to by the 43 judges and clerks of election at each polling place within each 44 such district. The proposal to organize the junior college dis- 45 trict, to carry, m ust receive a m ajority of the total number of 46 votes cast thereon and the secretary of the state board of edu- 47 cation, from the results so certified and attested, shall deter- 48 mine w hether the proposal has received the m ajority of the 49 votes cast thereon and shall certify the results to the state 50 board of education. Should the secretary of the state board of 51 education certificate show that' the proposition to organize 52 such junior college district has received a m ajority of the 53 votes cast thereon, the state board of education shall make an 54 order declaring the junior college district organized and cause . 55 a copy thereof to be recorded in the office of recorder of deeds 56 in each county in which a portion of such new district lies. 57 If the proposition carries, the board shall also determine which 58 candidates have been elected trustees under section 5. Should 59 the proposition to organize the district fail to receive a m ajor- 60 ity of the votes cast thereon, no tabulation shall be made tp 61 determ ine the candidates elected trustees. Section 5. 1. In the organization election six trustees 2 shall be elected at large, except, that should there be in such 3 proposed junior college district one or more school districts 4 w ith more than thirty-three and one-third per cent and not 5 more than fifty per cent of the total school enumeration of 6 the proposed district, as determ ined by the last school enumer- 7 ation, then each such district shall elect two trustees and the • 8 rem aining trustees shall be elected at large from the re- 9 m ainder of the proposed district. Should any such school dis- 10 trict have more than fifty per cent and not more than sixty-six 11 and two-thirds per cent of the total school enumeration of 12 the proposed district then three trustees shall be elected at 13 large from such school district and three trustees at large from 14 the rem ainder of the proposed district. Should any such school t 15 district have more than sixty-six and two-thirds per cent of 16 the total school enum eration of the proposed district then four 17 trustees shall be elected at large from such school district and 18 two trustees elected at large from the rem ainder of the pro- 19 posed district. If the trustees are elected at large throughout 20 the entire proposed district, the two receiving, the greatest 21 num ber of votes shall be elected for terms of six years each, 22 the two receiving the next greatest num ber of votes, for terms 23 of four years each, the two receiving the next greatest num ber 24 of votes, for terms of two years each. If the trustees are elected 25 in any m anner other than at large throughout the entire pro- 26 posed district, then the trustees elected shall determ ine by lot 26a the two who shall serve for six years, the two who shall serve 27 for four years and the two who shall serve for two years. 28 Thereafter, all trustees elected shall serve for term s of six 28a years each. 29 2. Candidates for the office of ‘ trustee shall be citizens of ,30 the United States, at least thirty years of age who have been 31 resident taxpayers of the proposed district for at least one 32 whole year preceding the election and, if trustees are elected 33 other than at large they shall be resident taxpayers of those 34 election districts for at least one whole year next preceding 35 the election. All candidates for the first board of any such 36 district shall file their declarations of candidacy w ith the state 12 (2) W hether the assessed valuation of taxable, tangible 13 property in the proposed district is sufficient to adequately 14 support the proposed junior college; and 15 (3) W hether there w ere a sufficient num ber of graduates 16 of high school in the proposed district during the preceding 17 year to support a junior college in the proposed district. When 18 such a district is organized, it shall be a body corporate and 19 a subdivision of the state of Missouri and shall be known as 20 "The Junior College D istrict of ............................., Missouri” 21 and, in that name, may sue and be sued, levy and collect taxes 22 w ithin the limitations of this act, issue bonds and possess the 23 same corporate powers as common, city, town, consolidated 24 and reorganized school districts in this state, exeept as herein 25 otherwise provided. Section 2.- 1. Ju n io r college districts formed prior to 2 the effective date of this act and those form ed under the pro- 3 visions of this act shall be' under the supervision of the state 4 board of education. 5 2. It shall be the duty of the state board of education to: 6 (1) Establish the role of the tw o-year college in the state; 7 (2) Set up a survey form to be used for local, surveys of 8 need and potential for two-year colleges; provide supervision 9 in the conducting of surveys; require th at the results of the 10 studios be used in reviewing applications for approval; and 11 to establish and use the survey results to set up priorities; 12 (3) Require that the initiative to establish two-year col- 13 leges come from the area to be serv ed ;, 14 (4) Administer the state financial support program ; 15 (5) Supervise the junior college districts formed under 16 the provisions Of this act and the junior college districts now 17 in existence, and formed prior to the effective date of this 18 act; 19 (6) Form ulate and p ut into effect, uniform policies as 20 to budgeting, record keeping, and student accounting; 21 (7) Establish uniform minim um entrance requirem ents 22 and uniform curricular offerings for all ju n io r colleges; 24 (8) Make a continuing study of junior college education 25 in the state; and 20 (9) Bo responsible for the accreditation of each junior 27 college under its supervision. Accreditation shall be con- 28 ducted annually or as often as deemed advisable and made 29 in a m anner consistent with the rules and regulations estab- 30 lishcd and applied uniformly to all junior college districts in 31 the slate. Standards for accreditation of junior colleges shall 32 be formulated w ith due consideration given to curriculum 33 offerings and entrance requirem ents of the U niversity of Mis- 34 souri. Section 3. The boundaries of any junior college district 2 organized under this act shall coincide w ith the boundaries 3 of the school district or' of the contiguous school districts pro- 4 posed to be included, and such junior college district shall be 5 in addition to any common, city, town, consolidated, reor- 0 ganized, special or other school districts existing in any por- 7 tlon of such area. Section 4. W henever there is presented to the state board ^2 of education a petition, signed by qualified voters in each 3 common, city, town, consolidated and reorganized school dis- 4 trict within a proposed junior college district area, equal in 5 num ber to five per cent of the num ber of votes cast within 6 each such component school district at the last preceding 7 school election in each such school district at which a director 0 was elected, praying that a junior college district be organ- rs. 9 ized for the purpose of offering junior college (13th and 14th 10 year) cqurses, should the state board of education determ ine 11 th at the area proposed to be included w ithin said district meets 12 the standards established by it under the provisions of this 13 act, it shall order an election held w ithin the proposed district 14 to vote on the proposal and to elect trustees, at the next fol- 15 lowing annual school election or meeting. Should annual 16 school elections of component school districts w ithin a pro- 17 posed junior college district area not be held on the same 18 date, the state board of education shall set the date for the or- 19 ganization election. At such election, the proposition shall be 20 in substantially the following form: 21. PROPOSITION 22 Shall there be organized w ithin the area comprising the 37 board of education at least thirty days prior to the date of the 38 organization election. Section 6. Notice of the organization election shall be 2 given by the state board of education by publication in at 3 least one newspaper of general circulation in each county in- 4 eluding any portion of the proposed junior college district, and 5 within each city not in a county within such district, once a 6 week for three consecutive weeks, tlie last insertion to be no 7 longer than one week prior to the date of election. The elcc- 8 tion shall be conducted in the same m anner, at the same 9 polling places and by the same election officials who are con- 10 ducting elections on that day in each component school dis- 11 trict. Should there be no school election conducted on that 12 day in any component school district within the proposed 13 junior college district, then for such component school dis- 14 trict the polling places and the judges and clerks of election 15 shall be selected and the election conducted in the same man- 16 ner and by the same board or body as select judges and clerks 17 and conduct elections in that component district. Section 7. Newly elected members of the board of trus- 2 tecs shall bo qualified by taking the oath of office prescribed 3 by article VII, section 2, of the constitution of Missouri. The 4 board shall be organized by the election of a president and 5 vice-president, a secretary and a treasurer, said secretary and 6 treasurer may be or may not be members, of the board. A 7 m ajority of the board shall constitute a quorum for the trans- 0 action of business, but no contract shall be let, teacher em- 9 ployed or dismissed, or bill approved unless a m ajority of the 10 whole board shall vote therefor. Any vacancy occurring in 11 the board shall be filled by appointment by the rem aining '12 members of the board, and the persons appointed shall hold 13 office until the next election held by such junior college dis- 14 trict when a trustee shall bo elected for the uncxpired term. 15 The board shall keep a common seal with which to attest its 16 official acts. Section 8. After organization, the qualified voters of the 2 junior college district shall vote for trustees and on all other 3 propositions provided by law for submission at school elections 4 which are applicable to junior college districts. Should any 5 component school district hold its elections on the first Tues- 6 day after the first Monday in April in the years such proposi- 7 tions m ust be voted upon, then such elections shall bo held 8 in the same m anner and with elections being held in the com- 9 ponent common, city, town, consolidated and reorganized 10 school districts w ithin the boundaries of such junior college 11 district. If no school election is hold in any school district 12 within a junior college district on the, date of an election in a 13 junior college district under this section, then the board of 14 trustees of such junior college district shall provide polling 15 places and election officials in the same m anner as such places 16 and officials are provided for organization elections for com- 17 ponent districts not having an annual election as provided 18 under section 6 of this act. In all other junior college districts 19 such elections shall be held on the first Tuesday in April in 20 the years such propositions shall be voted upon. All costs in- 21 cidcnt to such elections shall be borne by the junior college 22 district; Notice of all such elections shall be given by the 23 board of trustees by publication in at least one newspaper 24 of general circulation within each county, and w ithin each city 25 not in a county within such district, at least once a week for •26 three consecutive weeks, the last insertion to be no longer 27 than one week prior to the date of election. Should trustees 28 be elected other than at large throughout the entire district, 29 then only those qualified voters within the district from which 30 the trustee or trustees arc to be elected shall cast their bal- 31 lots for the trustee or trustees from that district. All candi- 32 dates for the office of trustee shall file their declarations of 33 candidacy with the secretary of the board of trustees at least 34 thirty days prior to the date of election. If voting machines “ 35 are not used in a common city, town, consolidated or rcor- 36 ganized school district which is within such junior college 37 district, then the board of trustees shall cause ballots to be 38 printed and distributed for the polling places in such com- 39 ponent districts at the expense of the junior college district, 40 but in all other respects said elections shall be held at the 41 same time, in the same places and shall be conducted by the 42 same officials for elections being held in such common, town, 43 city, consolidated, and reorganized school districts. The secre- 44 tary of the board of education, district cleric or the board of 45 election commissioners, as the case may be, in each component 40 school district, shall certify to the board of trustees of the 47 junior college district the total num ber of votes cast for each 48 candidate and the voles cast on all questions submitted within 49 fifteen days after any election. W ithin forty-eight hours thcre- 50 after, at least a m ajority of the then qualified members of the 51 board of trustees of such junior college district shall jointly 52 tabulate the results so received, shall declare and certify the i 53 candidates receiving the greatest num ber of votes for terms 54 of six years each and until their successor shall have been 55 elected and qualified and shall declare and certify the results 56 of the votes cast on any question presented at such election. 57 "Qualified voters”, under the provisions of this act, shall mean 58 those voters qualified to vole in the school election of the com- 59 ponent common, city, town, consolidated or reorganized school 60 district. Section 9. A junior college district organized under this 2 act shall provide instruction,’ classes, school or schools for 3 pupils resident w ithin the junior college district who have 4 completed an approved high school course. The board of 5 trustees of such district shall determ ine the per capita cost 6 of such college courses, file the same w ith the state board of 7 education and upon approval thereof by the state board of 8 education, shall require of all nonresidents who are accepted 9 as pupils, a tuition fee in such sum os may be necessary for 10 maintenance of such college course or courses. Ini addition 11 thereto, such board may charge resident pupils such amounts 12 as it deems necessary to m aintain such college courses, tak- 13 ing into consideration such other funds as may be available 14 under law for the support of such college courses. Section 10. The board of trustees shall appoint the em- 2 ployees of the junior college, define and assign their powers 3 and duties and fix their compensation. All certificated per- 4 sonncl shall be members of the public school retirem ent sys- 5 tern of Missouri under provisions of section 169.010, RSMo. Section 11. Any tax imposed on property subject to the 2 taxing power of such junior college district under article X, 3 section 11 (a) of the constitution w ithout voter approval shall 4 not exceed the annual rale of ten cents on the hundred dollars 5 assessed valuation in districts having one billion dollars, or 6 more, assessed valuation; tw enty cents on the hundred dollars 7 assessed valuation in districts having more than five hundred 8 million dollars but less than one billion dollars assessed valu- 9 'ation; thirty cents on the hundred dollars assessed valuation 10 in districts having more than one hundred million dollars but 11 less than five hundred million dollars assessed valuation; and 12 forty cents on the hundred dollars assessed valuation in dis- 13 tricts having less than one hundred million dollars assc - > d 14 valuation. Increases of the rate with voter approval shall be 15 made in the same m anner as in common, city, town, consoli- 16 dated, and reorganized districts. Section 12. All real and tangible personal property 2 owned by railroads, street railways, boats, vessels, bridge 3 companies, telegraph companies, electric light and power 4 companies, electric transmission line companies, pipe line com- 5 panics, express companies, air line companies and other com- 6 panies and public utilities whose property is assessed by the 7 State Tax Commission shall be taxed at the same rate of 8 taxation which is levied on other property in such junior col- 9 lege district in the same m anner and to the same extent that 10 such property is subject to assessment and taxation for gen* 11 eral county purposes, and. all of the provisions of Chapters 12 151, 153, 154, nnd 155, RSMo 1959, shall likewise apply to 13 taxation by such junior college districts to the same extent 14 as if such junior college districts were specifically included 15 in the provisions contained in said Chapters 151, 153, 154, and 16 155, except that the taxes levied by such junior college dis- 17 tricts shall not be included for the purpose of determining 18 the average school levy for the other school districts in the 19 county in which they are situated. The taxes so levied against 20 such properly by such junior college districts shall be col- 21 lectcd in the same m anner as taxes are collected on such prop- 22 erty from general county taxes. Section 13. 1. All students, resident in the state of Mis- 2 souri attending schools or classes of the ju n io r college district 3 shall be included in the attendance records of the junior col- 4 lege district for the apportionm ent of school funds. The junior 5 college district shall be entitled to receive from state funds 6 appropriated for junior college purposes the sum of two hun- 7 dred dollars for each thirty semester hours of college credit 0 completed by all students in the junior college during the pre- 0 ceding year; provided, however, that any ju n io r college dis- 10 trict organized under the provisions of this act'sh all be en- 11 titled to slate aid as provided in this section during the first ’ 12 year of its organization on an estim ated num ber of sem ester 13 hours of college credit completed by all students, this estimate 14 to be adjusted on on actual num ber of college hours com- 15 plcted at the end of the year as defined in this act. A year is 16 defined as from July 1 to June 30 of the following year. The 17 term sem ester hour completed means for the purpose of such 18 claims actual participation during half or m ore of the session 19 such course is offered. In the case of sem ester hours com- 20 plcted in a summer school session, the claim for such reim- 21 burscm cnt shall be presented in the claim covering that par- 22 ticular school year in which such sum m er session ends. The 23 actual number of pupils in attendance shall be computed by 24 taking the total num ber of sem ester hours of work in which 25 all junior college students arc registered as of November 1 26 and March 1 in any,school year and dividing by thirty. 27 2. School districts offering two-year college courses 28 under section 165.123, RSMo, on the effective date of this act 29 shall receive state aid under subsection 1 of this section pro- 30 vided all standards established under and pursuant to this 31 act arc met. Section 14. W henever there is w ithin any school district 2 any school properly that is not required for the use of the 3 school district and such projjerty could be used for purposes 4 of offering education beyond grade twelve by an institution 5 of higher education, the board of education is hereby author- 6 ized to lease or sell and convey the same to such public in- 7 stitution, and the proceeds derived from such sale shall be 8 placed to the credit of the building fund of such district. Section 15. W henever the area of an entire school district 2 which adjoins a junior college district organized under this 3 law desires to be attached thereto and become a part of such 4 junior college district it m ay do so in the same m anner as is 5 provided for annexation under .section 1G5.300, RSMo; pro- G vidcd that whenever the area of an entire school district 7 which adjoins a district offering a two year college course 8 under Section 105.123, RSMo, on the effective date of this 0 act and receiving aid under subsections 1 and 2 of section 13 10 of this act, desires to he attached thereto for junior college 11 purposes only, such annexation shall ho completed under sec- 12 tion 105.300, RSMo, except that upon such annexation, a spc- 13 cial junior college district shall he established in the entire 14 area us provided in this act. If the hoard of trustees of the 15 receiving district rejects the petition for annexation, the 16 state board of education may bo petitioned for a hearing and 17 upon receipt of such petition the stale hoard shall establish the 18 time and place and proceed to a hearing. If the stale board of 19 education finds that refusal to honor the petition for anncxa- 20 tion has been made without good cause, the state board in 21 its discretion muy withhold a portion or all of the state aid 22 from said district which is payable under the provisions of 23 this act. Section 16. All junior colleges established prior to the 2 effective dale of this act shall be under the supervision of the 3 state board of education and shall conform to the scholastic 4 standards established by the board, but no such district may 5 be dissolved except as now provided by law and in no instance 6 because it docs not meet the standards for organization cs- 7 tablishcd by the slate board of education under the provisions 8 of section 1 of this act. APPENDIX B CALIFORNIA STATE STATUTES THAT DO NOT MENTION THE LIBRARY OR THE LIBRARIAN 332 California. Administrative Code. 1 9 6 9 * Title Register 6 9 , No. 59, Pt. Vi” . Chap. Sects. 50000-5004-7 • TITLE 5 C a lifo rn ia C o m m u n it y Colleges (Register 69, No. 39— 9*27*69) 601 PART VI. BOARD OP GOVERNORS OP THE CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGES C h a pt e r 1. C a lifo rn ia C o m m u n it y C olleges SUROHAPTER 1. SuncnAPTER 2. SUDOHAPTER 4. SUDCIIAPTF.il 4.1. SuDcnATTEn 4.G. S u d c i ia p t e r 5. SuncnAPTER 5.5. G e n e r a l P r o v is io n s P e r s o n n e l S erv ices B u s in e s s S erv ices J u n i o r C o lle o e C o n s t r u c t i o n Act J u n i o r C o lle g e C o n s t r u c t i o n A c t or 1907 C u r r ic u l u m a n d I n s t r u c t io n E d u c a tio n a l ly H a n d ic a pp e d P u t il s SuncnAPTER 1 . G e n e r a l P r o v is io n s Article 1. Rules of Procedure of the Board of Governors of the California Commu* ,nlty Colleges 2. Standard Designated Subjects Teach* Ing Credential In Afro-American Studies Article 1. Article 8. Standard Designated Subjects Teach ing Credential with a Specialization in Vocational Agriculture 4,.Stnudnrd Dcslgnntcd Subjects Teach* ing Credential in Mcxican-Amcrican Studies 5. Community College Standards' DETAILED ANALYSIS of the California Community Colleges Section Section 50000. Name 50023. Minutes 50001. Composition 50024. Order of Business a t Regular 00002. Terms of-Office Meetings 50003. Vacancy 50025. Order of Business a t Special 50004. Exercise of Powers Meetings 50005. Officers 50020. Agenda 50000. Chnirman and Vice-Chairman 50027. Presentations to the Board of 50007. Chancellor Governors 50008. Cbnncellor’s Staff 50028. Rules of Order 50009. Vacancy 50029. Committees 50010. Chairman 50030. Chairman G0011. Vicc-Chnlrman 50031. Vacancies G0012. Chairman Pro Tempore 50032. Quorum 50013. Chancellor 50033. Rules 50014. Joint Duties 50034. Function 50015. Other Duties 50035. Spccinl Committees 50010. ..-Compensation 50030.' Committee Reports' 50017. Contracts 50037. Record of Committee Action 50018. Regulnr Meetings, 50038. Representatives 50010. Special Meetings 50039. Selection 50020. Quorum 50040. Procedure 50021. Adjournment When No Qnorum 50022. Public Meeting. Executive Be*- Article 2. Standard Designated Subjects Teaching Credential in Afro-American Studies Section 50045. Definition 600-10. Specific Requirement for Stand ard Designated Subjects Teach ing Credential 60047. Specific Requirements for Pro visional Standard Designated Subjects Teaching Credential in Afro-American Stndlea Section 50048. Course Requirements 50040. Baccalaureate Equivalencies 50050. Authorization for Service 60051. Renewal 60052. Time and Circumstances 602 E d u c a t i o n TITLE 6 (R egister 69, No. 39—9-27*69) Article 8. Standard Designated Subjects Teaching Credential with ■ Specialization in Vocational Agriculture Section . Section . 60060. Definition 60003. Isnunnce on Condition Upon 60001. Specific Requirements 1 ’ariial Fulfillment of Xlequlre- 60002. Authorization for Service niruts Article 4. Standard Designated Subjects Teaching Credential in Mexican-Amcricnn Studies Section Section 60070. Definition 60073. Minimum Course Requirements 60071. Specific Requirement for Stand- 60074. Equivalencies aid Dcaignulcd Subjects Tench- 60075. Authorization for Service ing Credential 60070. Renewal 60072. Specific Requirements for Pro- 60077. Time and Circumstances visional Standard Designated Subjects Teaching Credential in Mcxicnn-Anicricnn Studies Article 6. Community College Standards Section Section 61000. State Aid 1 5100-1. Academic Senates or Faculty 61001. Rnsis of Courses Offered Councils 51002, Requirements 51005. Requirements for Degrees and 61003. Criteria and Standnrda for Certificates Graded Community College Courses in Grades 13 and 14 Article .1. Rules of Procedure of the Bonrd of Governors of the Cnlifornia Community Colleges 60000. Name. The name of this Bonrd is “The Board of Gov ernors of the Cnlifornia Community Colleges," hereinafter referred to as "Board of Governors." N o t e : Authority cited: Section 163, Education Code. Jlinlori/: 1. New Chapter 0 (55 50000 through 50040) filed 2-0-00: procedural and organizational, effective upon filing (Register 00, No. 0 ). 60001. Composition, The Board, of Governors shall consist of 15 members, who arc appointed by the Governor with the advice and consent of two-thirds of the Senate. Any such member, who is serving on a local junior college governing board tit the time of his appointment must resign from the local junior college governing bonrd before his appointment becomes effective. 60002. Terms of Office. The term of the first Board of Gover nors members shall be mensured in accordance with Education Code Section 186. Thereafter, the terms of office of the members of the Board of Governors shall be four yenrS. 60003. Vacancy. Any vacancy on the Board of Governors shall be filled by nppointment by the Governor, subject to confirmation by two-thirds of the Senate. The appointee to fill a vacancy shall hold office only for the balance of the uncxpired term. 335 TITLE 5 C a lifo rn ia C o m m u n it y C olleges 602.1 (R toU ter 69, No. 39—8-87-69) 60004. Exorcise of Powers. The Board of Governors shall act only at meetings called and held as provided in these rules. All official actB.of the Board of Governors shall require the affirmative vote of at least eight members. The vote of all members shall be recorded. 60005. Officers. The officers of the Board of Governors shall he the Chairman, the Vice-Chairman, and the Chancellor. 60006. Chairman and Vioc-Ohairman. Each year at the Janu ary meeting, the members of the Board of Governors shall select two of their members to serve as Chairman and Vicr- Chairman respectively. They shall take office as the last order of business at said January meeting. The Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Board of Gover nors shall not be elected for more than two consecutive terms plus any unexpircd terms to which he may have previously been elected. 60007. Chancellor. The Chief Executive Officer of the California Community Colleges shall be called Chancellor. lie shall be appointed by the Board of Governors and shall'serve at the pleasure of the ap pointing power. The Chancellor shall execute such duties and responsi bilities as may be delegated to him by the Board of Governors. 50008. Chancellor's Staff. The Chancellor shall employ and fix the compensation, in accordance with law, of such assisting staff as he deems necessary to effectively conduct the work of the Board of Gov ernors and the Office of the Chancellor; and may authorize such assist ing staff to perform in the name of the Chancellor of any of the Chan cellor * s authorized duties. 50009. Vacancy. In the event there is an interim vacancy in the office of Chairman or Vice-Chairman, a successor may be elected to hold office for the unexpired term. 50010. Chairman. The Chairman shall be the presiding officer at meetings of the Board of Governors. The Chairmen is on ex officio member of all committees. 50011. Vice-Chairman. In the absence of the Chairman or his inability to act, the Vice-Chairman shall preside at meetings of the Board of Governors. The Vice-Chairman is an cx officio member of all committees. 50012. Chairman Pro Tempore. In case of the absence or in ability to act of both the Chairman and Vice-Chairman, the Board of Governors Bhall elect for that meeting a Chairman Pro Tempore, and may authorize such Chairman Pro Tempore to act in the place of the Chairman and Vice-Chairman. 50013. Chancellor. The Chancellor shall cause public notice to be given of all meetings of the Board of Governors and of committees thereof. The Chancellor shall cause the minutes of all official meetings of the Board of Governors to be recorded and kept in chronological order, including the minutes of all of the Board of Governors' Committees. TITLE 5 C a l i f o r n i a C o m m u n ity C o l le g e s 603 (R egister 69, No. 6—2*8-69) The CJmnccllor shall cause to be filed or recorded in appropriate offices of public record or posted or published, nil documents and notices thnt arc required by law, or required for the protection of the Board of Governors to be so filed, recorded, published or posted. The Chancellor shall preserve nil papers, letters, documents, and transactions of the Board of Governors. The Chnncellor is authorized,- in the name of the Board of Gov ernors, to execute proxies, sign receipts and acknowledgements, and notices and declarations ns may be appropriate in the performance of his duties. The Chnncellor shall keep an accurate record of all funds of the Board of Governors and will report the financial stnnding of the Board of Governors semi-annually. • 50014. Joint Duties. The Chairman and the Chancellor shall certify ns to resolutions adopted by the Board of Governors or its com mittees; and the Chairman-and the Chancellor shall certify and sign the official minutes of the Board of Governors. 50015. Other Duties. The officers of the Board of Governors shall have such powers and shall perform such duties in addition to those set forth in these rules ns may be delegated to them by the Board- of Governors. 50016. Compensation. The members of the Board of Governors shall serve without pay. They shall receive their actual and necessary traveling expenses while on official business. 50017. Contracts. No member of the Board of Governors may make or enter into a contractual arrangement on behalf of the Board of Governors unless specifically authorized to do so by the Board. 50018. Regular Meetings. The schedule of regular meetings for each calendar year shall be prepared by the Chairman and the Chan cellor and shall be adopted by resolution at the. last regulnr meeting of the preceding year. The regular meetings will be held primarily in Ran Francisco, Los Angeles, or Rnernmcnto, but may be held any place in California designated by the Board of Governors. 50019. Special Meetings. The Chairmnn of the Board of Gov ernors, the Chnncellor, or any eight members thereof, may call special meetings of the Board of Governors'at. any time; and notice of time, place, and purpose thereof shall he given each and every Board of Governors' member by letter or telegram addressed to him at his Inst known residence or place, of business in time to x'eneh him at least 24 hours before the lime appointed for such meeting. No business other than that mentioned in the notice of a special meeting shall be con sidered thereat. A record of the service of notice shall bn entered upon the minutes of the Board of Governors, and those minutes when rend nud approved at the subsequent meeting of the Board of Governors shall be conclusive of the fact thnt notice was given ns required. " 50020. Quorum. Eight (8) me ’bcrs of tho Bonrd of Governors shall constitute n quorum to transact business. 601 E d u c a t i o n TITLE 6 (R egliter 69, No. 6—2-8-69) 50021. Adjournment When No Quorum. Any meeting may be adjourned ami its business continued to :m appointed day by the vote of a majority of the members present, oven though there shall be less than a quorum. 50022. Public Meeting. Executive Session. All meetings of the Board of Governors shall be open and public unless in executive session. Executive sessions arc restricted to consideration of personnel matters as described in Education Code Section 195 and Government Code Section 11126, and other matters in accordance with law. 50023. Minutes. All communications presented to the Board of Qoevrnors shall be filed by the Chnncellor, Unless otherwise ordered, only the reports of committees and/or report of the Chnncellor shall appear in the minutes. .50024. Order of Business at Regular Meetings. The order iB as follows: Roll Call Ping Salute ^ ' Approval of minutes of the Inst meeting Report of the Chnncellor Reports of Standing Committees Reports of Special Committees New Business Adjournment 50025. Order of Business at Special Meetings. The order is as Follows: Roll Call Rending of notice nnd statement of service Special business for which the meeting was called Adjournment 50026. Agenda. The agenda of business for all meetings of the Board of Governors will be developed by the Chairman nnd the Chan cellor. At least five days prior to each regular meeting the Chancellor shall cause to be mailed, to each member of the Board of Governors an agenda setting forth nil business to be considered at that meeting. 60027. Presentations to the Board of Governors, (a) Commu nications, both oral nnd written, for presentation to the Bonrd of Governors shall be requested in writing nnd may be presented by the Chancellor at the next regular meeting following receipt. (b) Persons wishing to malm nn oyal presentation to the Bonrd of Governors may do so in accordance with the following provisions: A written request, to address the Board of Governors or one of its committees shall be made to the Chancellor prior' to the meeting at which the requested presentation is to be made. Tho request shall include the name nnd address of the person requesting to spunk, the nnme of the organization or group represented, if any, and a stntement-of the subject to be presented. . TITLE 5 C a l if o r n ia C o m m u n it y C o l l e g e s 605 (B*0lat«r 69, No. IB—6*10*69) Tho proposed speaker may speak only if and when rccog* nized by the Chairman of the Board of Governors or by a committeo chairman. Five minutes may bo allotted to each speaker and twenty minutes to each subject matter, subject to extension by the Chairman or acting Chairman of the Board of Governors, or by tho particular committee chairman. (c) No oral presentation shall include chnrgcB or complaints against any employee of the Board of Governors, regardless of whether or not the employee is identified in the presentation, by name or by any other reference which tends to identify him. All charges or com plaints against employees shall be submitted to the Bonrd. in writing. The Bonrd will consider tho complaint in executive session. The Board, if it deems it advisable, may allow the complainant to be heard at the executive session. • 50028. Rules of Order. Tho rules contained in Robert’ s Rules of Order Revised, as copyrighted by Isabel 11. Robert in 1951, shall govern the proceedings nnd conduct of the meetings of the Board of Governors and its committees in all cases tlmt are not covered in or by the Rules or Standing Orders of the Board of Governors. 50029. Committees. There is hereby created the following stand ing committees, the membership of which shall bo designated by the Clmirmnn in conjunction with the Chancellors 1. Committee on Finance 2. Committee on Educational Programs 3. Committee on Campus Physical Facilities 4. Committee.on Procedure and Relationships 5. Committee on Vocational Education 6. Committee on Legislation 50030. Chairman. One member of each committee shall be desig nated Clmirmnn by the persons authorized to appoint the members thereof. 60031. Vacancies. Vacancies in the membership of any commit tee may be filled by appointments made in the same manner as provided In the case of the original appointments. 50032. Quorum. A majority of the whole committee shall con stitute a quorum and the act of the majority of the members present at the meeting at which a quorum is present shall be the act of the com mittee. 60033. Rules, Each committee shall be subject to nnd, conduct their business consistent with the Rules of Procedure of the Board of Governors. 50034. Function. Matters appropriate for the consideration of n committee shall be assigned thereto by the Chancellor. Unless other wise specifically delegated, authority to act on behalf of the Board of Governors is reserved to the Board of Governors, and the duty of each 606 E d u c a t i o n TITLE 5 (R egister 69, No. 19—B-10-09) committee shell be only to consider and to make recommendations to the Bonrd of Governors upon matters assigned to it. 60035. Special Committees, Special committees may be created from time to time ns the Chnirmnn nnd the Chancellor deem necessary. Such Special Committees'shall be subject to any and all rules nnd regulations applicable to the Stnnding Committees. 60030. Committee Reports. Committee reports may bo consid ered by the Board of Governors at the next regular meeting following the meeting of the committee. 60037. Record of Committee Action, A written record of com mittee notions nnd recommendations shall be kept by the Chancellor. 60038. Representatives. The representatives of the Board of Governors to tho Coordinating Council for Higher Education shall be the Chnncellor and two (2) members of the Board of Governors nnd one alternate. 50039. Selection. The members of the Bonrd of Governors, men- tioned in 50038 above, shall be selected annually, at the same meet ing and by the same process the officers of the Board of Governors are chosen. 60040. Procedure. These rules may be amended at any regular meeting of the Bonrd of Governors by the affirmative vote of eight members, provided thnt notice of any proposed amendment, including a draft thereof, shnll be mailed to the Board of Governors’ members at least five days prior to the meeting at which the proposed amend ment is to be acted upon; nnd such amendment shall become effective thirty days after adoption. Article 2. Standard Designated Subjects Teaching Credential in Afro-American StudieB 50045, Definition. For the purposes of this article, "Afro- American Studies” means the study of the Afro-Amcricnn Community, its people, politics, culture, philosophy, art., music, literature, economics, history, nnd social development. N on:: Authority cited for Art. 2: Sections 193, 197, 8352 nnd 8353, Educa tion Code. Jlixtaru: 1. N ew A rticle 2 (Scetim m 500/5 through 50052) filed 5-5-09; effec tive th irtieth day thereafter (R egister 09, No. 19). 50046, Specific Requirement for Standard Designated Subjects Teaching Credential. The specific requirement for the Standard Designated Subjccis Teaching Crcdenjial in Afro-American Studies to be used in grades 13 and 14 is that described as follows: (a) A master’s degree, with a major in Afro-American studies. 50047, Specific Requirements for Provisional Standard Desig nated Subjects Teaching Credential in Afro-American Studies include all of the following: t California. Education Code. 1969* Division 18.5 Chap. 1. Sections” 25^10-25^2^. 1 6 6 0 EDUCATION CODE) DIVISION 18.5. JUNIOR COLLEGES Notoi Section 53 of 8tntR, 1003, Cb. (120 provident Rf.o. 53. If the provlnlona of Dlvlolon 18,5 of (bo Education Code, aa added by Senate Dill No. 78 of the 10113 Itcpnlnr Reunion, conflict with tho provialona of this act It la the Intent of the Legislature that the provlnlona of Division 18.5 Bhnll prevail. , N o t.i Section 27 of Stats. 1003, Ch. 1751 provides: B e o . 27. In the event any provision of Division 18.5 of the Education Oodo na added or nmendcd nt the 1003 General Session conflicts with' provisions of Divisions 4 nnd 5 of tho Education Code, aa added or amended nt the 1003 General Session, it is the intent of tho Legislature that the provisions of Division 18.0 shall prevail. C h a pt e r 1. G overning B oards (Chapter 1 added by Stats. 1963, Ch. 100) Article 1. Composition and Organization (Article 1 added by Stats. 1963, Ch. 100) Governing Board of Junior College District Coterminous With High School or Unified District 25410. In any junior college district coterminous, with a unified district, the governing board of the unified district shall, except as provided in this section or in Section 25444.5, constitute the junior college board and after organizing as a junior college board shall have the management and control of the junior college in the district. If the district is divided into two or more unified districts, or if any territory is in cluded within the boundaries of such junior college district by annexation thereto or by change of boundaries thereof, which territory is not included within the unified district, such junior college district shall bo governed by a bonrd of five members who shall be elected in the same manner, for the snme terms, nnd at the same time ns arc members of the governing boards of other districts. Within 15 days after the effective date of the annexation or change of boundaries for the purpose of electing members of the governing bonrd, the. county superin tendent of schools having jurisdiction over the junior college district shall call an election. The election shall be called and conducted in the manner provided by law for an election to choose the first governing board members of a newly formed junior college district. (Added by .Stats, 19(13, Ch. 100; amended by Slats. 1963, Ch. 1014, by Stnts. 1965, Ch. 1046, nnd by Stats. 19G8, Ch. 274.) Election of Governing Boards by Wards 25410.5, In every junior college district, which wns divided into five wards on or before September 7, 1055, one member of the board shall be elected.from ench ward by the registered votcm of the ward. On or before Jnnunry 1st of a fiscal year the governing board of the district may rearrange the bound aries of the wards to provide for representation in accordance 341 EDUCATION CODE 1661 with population and geographic factors or may abolish the wayrds. 25411. The county commlttco on school district organize* tlon, upon petition of tho governing .board of any junior collego district, mny provide for the establishment, rearrange* mcnt, or abolishment of trustee nreas in any junior college district or increase or decrease the number of members of the governing, board, in the same manner as trustee areas may be S rovided for in other districts under Sections 1123 to 1125.6, idusive. When trustee areas are established or rearranged under this Beotidn, governing board members shall be elected for four-year terms, and Bhall be either five or seven in number. Tho number of trusteo areas shall not be leB S than two nor more than seven. Subject to provisions of this section, any resident and reg istered clcotor of tho Bchool district not disqualified by the Constitution or laws of tho state is eligible to candidacy for, and appointment and election to; the governing board of a junior college district in which trustee areas have been pro vided under this section. When trustee areas aro established or rearranged under this Boction, the petition to tho county committee by tho governing board shall provide for election of trustees by ono of the fol lowing mcthodsi a) Election, of an elector residing in and registered to vote . in the trustee area ho seeks to represent, by only the registered electors of the same trusteo area; b) Election, of an elector residing in and registered to vote in the trustee area he seeks to represent, by the registered electors of the entire junior college district. (Added by StatB. 1963, Oh. 100; amended by Stats. 1967, Ch. 808.) 26411,1. (Added in identical language by Stats. 1963, Ch. 1044 nnd Ch. 1761. Section ns added by StatB. 1963, Ch. 1044, rcpenled by Stats. 1965, Ch. 204.) 25411.2-25411.4. (Added in identical language by Stats. 1963, Ch. 1044 nnd Ch. 1751. Section ns added by Stnts. 1963, Ch. 1044, repealed by Stats. 1965, Ch. 204. Repealed by Stats. ' 1969, Ch. 634.) Membership of Governing Boards 25411.5. In every junior college district in which trustee areas hnve not been established, thero Bhall be a governing board of either five or seven members elected at large from tho district to serve a term of four years. If trustee areas have been established in a junior college district the governing (Added by Stats. 1903, Ch. 100.) ) Trustee Areas 342 1662 EDUCATION CODE board shall consist of a member or members from each trustee area. (Added by Stats. 1963, Ch. 100; amended by Stats. 1967, Ch. 608.) Special Eloclion for Rearrangement of Trusteo Area Boundaries) Procedure 25411.6. Notwithstanding any provision of law to the con trary, if the governing bonrd of a junior college district finds thnt the boundaries of trustee areas do not conform to tho dis trict’s geography or population distribution due to annexation of territory to the district after the trustee boundaries were formed, the board may, in its discretion, order a special elec tion seeking voter approval for rearrangement of such areas in the manner provided in this section. Upon adoption of a resolution by a majority of the mem bers, the board shall call nnd conduct at least one (1) public hcariug on the proposed rearrangement of trustee area bounda ries by publishing notice thereof in accordance with Section 6061 of the Government Code. The notice shall be published at least 10 days prior to each hearing to be held and shall state tho time nnd place of the hearing nnd the general nature of tho proposed boundary rearrangement. At the conclusion of such public hearing or hearings, the bonrd may adopt a resolution by mnjority vote of the members thereof ordering a special election on the proposed rearrange ment of trustee areas within the district. The election shall be consolidated with the next scheduled primary or general state wide election and shall be called and conducted by the county superintendent of schools having jurisdiction in the manner otherwise prescribed for elections in Division 4 of this code. . The ballot shall contain the following words properly lo cated thereon! "F o r the rearrangement of trustee areas in _______________ District—Yes’’ and "F o r the rearrange- (Inncrt name) mcnt of trustee areas i n _______________ District—No.’’ (lunert name) If the proposnl for the rearrangement of trustee nrens within tho district pursuant to this section is approved by a majority of the electors voting nt the election and it appears that one or more trustee areas in the district will not be represented in the membership of the governing bonrd or that one-or more trustee nreas will have more than its allotted number of rep resentatives in the membership of the governing board, the county superintendent of schools having jurisdiction slinll call nnd conduct nu election to determine who slinll represent such trustee nrea or areas nt .the next, regular election for junior college trustees ns otherwise provided by law. The term of of fice of a newly elected nnd qualified member shall expire on the dntc the term of the former member would have expired if tho former member had remained in office. If the offices of EDUCATION CODE 1G G 3 two or more members become vacant due to the operation of this paragraph, the superintendent shall determine by lot which term of office of former members shall be assumed by which of the newly elected and qualified members. (Added by Stats. 1964 (1st Ex. Sess.), Ch. 89.) election of Governing Board Members of Newly Formed Junior College District 25412. Upon the formation of a junior college district the county superintendent of schools having jurisdiction shall call and set the date of an election for the purpose of electing the governing board of the district. Such call shall be issued not later than 30 daj's after the formation of the district. Tha election shall be called, held, and conducted as arc elections for members of governing boards of elementary school dis tricts. (Added by Stats. 19G3, Ch. 100.) Term of Office of Governing Board Member* 25412.5. The first members of the governing board shall take office on the third Monday following their election. Tho term of office of subsequent members of the board shall begin on July 1st following their eleclion. (Added by Stats. 1963, Ch. 100.) Election of First Governing Board Members 25412.6. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 25412, the county superintendent of schools having jurisdiction may call and set the date for an election for the purpose of electing the governing board of the district on tho same date that the election is held for the formation of the junior college district. The call for both elections shall be issued at the same time. The election slinll be called, held and conducted ns are elections for members of the governing boards of elementary school districts (Added by Stats. 1963, Ch. 419.) Organization of Governing Board; Terms of Office 25413. At the initial meeting of the governing bonrd of a newly formed junior college district it shall elect one of its members ns chairman, and shall designate a secretary. The majority of members of the first elected board of any newly formed junior college district, the members of which majority received the highest, number of votes, shall serve until June 30 of the second succeeding odd-numbered year. The terms of the other members shall expire on June 30 of the first succeeding odd-numbered year. /\11 such members shall continue in office until their successors are elected and quali fied. (Added by Stats. 1963, Ch. 100; amended by Stats. 1965, Ch. 563.) lfiG4 EDUCATION CODE t i Provision for Separate Governing of Junior College District and City School District; Rights of Employees; Division of Properly 25413.1. When n junior college district, members of tho governing bonrd of •which nre nlso members of the governing bonrd of n city school district with nn nvcrnge daily attend- nnco of 400,000 or more in grndcs kindcrgnrtcn through 12, scrvcB n grcntcr nren tlinn the city school district, tho per sons who serve ns members on the governing bonrd of tho junior college district slinll not serve nlsO ns members of tho city school district bonrd. Those persons who serve n B mem bers of the governing boards of both the junior college dis trict nnd tho city school district shall, on or before December' 31, 19G8, elect on which of the two boards they will continue to serve. Those persons who elect to serve as members of ' cither the governing bonrd of the junior college district or the governing bonrd of the city school district shnll continue to serve nlso ns members of the governing board from which they have elected to withdraw until their successors on such board nre elected nt the governing board election next follow ing December 31,1968, nnd linvo nssuincd office. Prior to December 1, 1968, the governing bonrd shnll iden tify ench position the wnges or snlnry of which is pnid in : whole or in part from the funds of the junior college district nnd shall so notify ench incumbent. Ench employee whoso regulnr-position wnges or snlnry is paid exclusively from tho funds of either district ns of .June 30, 1969, shall be deemed on July 1, 1969 to be nn employee of the district pnying tho wnges or snlnry. Ench classified employee whose regulnr-posi tion wages or snlnry was upon written notification mode after July 1, 19 G B , pnid in part, from junior college district funds nnd in pnrt from city school district funds, nnd ench certifi cated employee pnid 50 percent or more from the funds of tho junior college districts, shnll make nn irrevocable, written elec tion on or before December 31,1968, ns to the district in which he will serve. Upon the effective date of the election, a classified employee in either .district shall have the right, bnscd upon his seniority in the position classification in which he is then serving, to transfer to a position in the same position classification in the. other district nnd to displace a classified employee with lesser seniority in such class employed in the other district, under rules established by the personnel com mission serving the city school district. Should such nn em ployee fail to make such election he shall be deemed to have elected to serve tho city school district. Such election shnll become effective on July 1,1969, unless the employee has prior to June 30, 1969 voluntarily accepted regular assignment to a rcgulnr position the wages or snlnry of which is pnid on June 30, 1969 exclusively by one district, nnd ho is tho incumbent in such position on snid date. After June 80, 1969, no such employee Bhall have tenure or clnssifica- EDUCATION CODE 1665 tion ns a permnncnt employee in other than the district in which ho elects to servo. If both the city school district nnd the junior college district have ndoptcd a merit system n B provided in Article 5 (com mencing with Section 13701) of Chapter 3, Division 10 of this code, nnd were served by a single personnel commission as pror yidcd in Section 13705, then a new personnel commission Bhall be appointed |p r the junior college district effective January 1,1969, or ns soon thereafter ns possible, under the procedure? applicable to the original appointments to the personnel com mission which has served both districts. Subsequent appoint ments shnll be made in accordance with Section 13707.4. Tho new personnel commission shnll be empowered to meet prior to July 1, 1969, for the purpose of appointing a personal di rector, nnd may enter into a contract with the personnel com mission which has served both districts for the necessary selec tion procedures. It may nlso take action on all other matters necessary for the orderly transition of responsibility bctwewji the two personnel commissions. The new personnel commission shnll appoint a personnel director in the manner provided in Section 13717 within 90 days after the appointment of at least two of its members, but not before July 1,1969. The personnel commission which had served both districts may continue to serve both districts pursuant to the terms of a contract which mny be entered into by the personnel commissions of both 6chool districts until such time ns the newly appointed per-. Bonnel commission determines that it can serve the junior col lege district. Except as otherwise provided in this section, the rights, benefits and burdens of regular classified employees of both tho city school district nnd the junior college district shall be fixed in accordance with tho provisions of Sections 13584 nnd 13584.1. The personnel commission of the junior college district shall initially adopt the rules of the personnel com mission which had served both districts. The governing board of the junior college district shall fix the compensation of classified employees in accordance with Section 13601.5. The junior college district shall maintain for a period of two year? after June 30, 1969 nt least the same benefits of salary, vaca tion, hospitnl-medical insurance, paid illness leave, and other pnid leaves provided for classified employees on June 30,1969. A classified employee who has probationary status in cither district on June 30, 1969, shnll remain in probationary- Btatus, with accumulated seniority credit, until he completes his proba tionary period. A classified employee who has permnncnt status on June 30, 1969, shnll have the rights and privileges listed below on nnd after the separation of the junior college and city school boards of cducntion s (a) Seniority’"for all purposes for all creditable service, as provided by the rules of the appropriate personnel commission, in either district. '' 66—78**6 3 4 6 1C G 6 EDUCATION CODE (b) Until July 1, 1970, in cnse of layoff from one district the right of reemployment in the other district, includiug the exercise of bumping rights, if the employee has the least 'seniority in liis class in the employing district. Subject to- the approval of the employing district, the privilege of being reinstated nftcr Inyoff in either district in a parallel class for a period of 27 months commencing July 1,1970. (c) Subject to the approval of the employing district, the privilege of reinstatement after resignation or voluntary de motion, and the privilege of transfer or voluntary demotion in either district, with tho approval of both districts, for a pcriod,of 39 months after July 1,1969. (d) The right to compete in promotional examinations in . both districts through June 30, 1970 for classes for which ho is qualified. (e) The retention of all accrued vacation and. illness leave • benefits. All classified eligibility lists which nre in effect on Juno 30, • 19G9, shall continue to be in effect in both districts, for appli cable classes, until they expire in accordance 'with Section 13738. Employees of both the city school district and the. jun ior college district who arc on such lists on June 30, I9G9 may be certified for and may accept appointments to positions in cither district. For the purposes of Section 13723, the junior college district shall be deemed to be a school district which had already adopted the merit system prior to the amendment of Section 13723 in 1965. It is the. intent of the Legislature ,in enacting this act to continue the rights, benefits, and privileges of regular classi fied employees, insofar aa practicable, without disruption which may be caused by the separation of the junior college and city boards of education. Any part or all of the land, buildings, fixtures, lenses, and other real property which arc jointly owned by tho city school district and the junior college district may, at the option of the city.school district, become the property of the city school district subject to the requirement that the city school district pay cash, or other valuable consideration acceptable to the junior college district, to the junior college district for its • proportionate interest in such real property. Such payments may be made in installments over n five-year period, commenc ing July 1, 19G9. Not less than 20.percent of such proportion ate. interest of the junior college district shall bn pnid in any one installment. Such property shnll be valued nt its insur- nble value ns of May 1, 19G9. Tn cases where the vnluo of real property cannot be. established by reference to insurable vnlue the market, value of the property shall be used for valua tion purposes. In order to provide for such payments, and for cash payments authorized in this section for the purpose of purchasing equipment., supplies, fixtures, vehicles, and other 347 EDUCATION CODE 1667 personal property, the maximum school district tax for suoh city school district is hereby increased by such amount as . will produco the limount of such payments made pursuant to this section, and the increase shall be in addition to any other schools district tax authorized by law to be levied. Such maxi* mum school district tax increase may be levied commencing July 1, 1968 and Bhall remain in effect until all payments to the junior college district for its interest in such real and per sonal property have been made. All equipment and supplies, including fixtures, and other personul property located in any school Bhall remain with and become the property of the district operating such BchooL Any part or all of the equipment, supplies, fixtures, and other personal property, located in a facility owned jointly by both ' such districts, and which property has been used jointly by both Buch districts muy, at the option of the city school dis- trict, become tho property of the city school district subject to the requirement that the city school district pay cash, or other valuable consideration acceptable to tho junior college district, to the junior college district for its proportionate interest in such personal property. Such personal property shall be valued at its insurable value as of May 1,1969. Equipment, supplies, and other stores possessed jointly by both districts as of July 1, 1969 shall be distributed in kind or in cash value in accordance with the costa as reflected in the records of the junior college district and the city Bchool district. Vehicles jointly owned or jointly used by tho city school district nnd by tho junior college district, includiug those used for grading, landscaping, building' or ground mainte nance, elenning, and for materials handling purposes, regard less of locntion, may, at the option of the city school district, become the property of the city school district, subject to the requirement that the city school district pay cash, or other valuable consideration acceptable to the junior college district, to the junior college district for its proportionate interest in such personal property. Such personal property shall be val ued at its insurable value ns of May 1 ,1969. One district may contract with the other district for the performance of services under such terms and conditions as may be agreed upon by the two districts. Whenever in this code a section refers to a district, or to two or more districts, governed by a single governing bonrd, or by governing boards of identical personnel, or to ft district or districts in which the average daily attendance is in excess of 400,000, or mnlcos a similar such reference, nil provisions of such section shnll apply with equnl forco to both such city school district nnd junior college district. (Added by Stats. 1967, Ch. 344 j. amended by Stats. 1968, Ch. 1177.) 1668 EDUCATION OODE Provision for Separate Governing of Junior College District and City School District/ Effectuation of Board Membership Status 25413.2. It is the intent nnd purpose of tho Legislature, by this section, to make more pnrticulnr provision concerning the governing board membership status of the individuals who, pursuant to Section 25413.1, have on or before December 31, 1968, made the election to serve either as members of the city board of education or as members of the governing board of the junior college district. If nn individual whoso term is to expire on Juno 30, 1971 elects to serve as a member of the governing bonrd of the junior college district only, such act shall be deemed to have created a vacancy in his membership on the city board of education, but such individual shall, nevertheless, continuo to serve as a member of the city board of education until Juno 30, 1969, as though appointed to fill tho vacancy until that time. Subject to such limitation,'the vacancy shall bo filled ns provided by law, or by or under authority of the city charter, whichever is controlling. The individual shall, after July 1,1969, Berve as a member of the governiug board of tho junior college district until the expiration of his term of of fice on June 30,1971. In 19G9, at the same time nnd in the same manner ns members of the city board of education are elected, an election shall be held in the junior college district to elect members of the junior college district governing board to fill the po sitions of the governing board members whose terms will expire on June 30, 1969, and the other governing board members, if any, whose terms will expire on June 30, 1971, nnd who have elected, pursuant to Section 25413.1, to serve ns members of the city board of education only. Of the members elected to the governing board of the junior college district in the 1969 general election, those receiving the lowest numbers of votes shall be deemed to have been elected to the positions,, if any, held by members whose terms would otherwise havo expired on June 30, J971, and who elected to serve on the city board of education only. Tho first term of oflico of nny such newly elected member receiving such lower number of votes shall expire on June 30, 1971. The electio'n shnll bo held throughout the junior college district, and the members elected to the junior college district governing board thereat shall be elected at large. For purposes of (Section 1225, tho governing board of tho junior college district shnll assign office numbers 1, 3, 5, and 7 to members whoso first terms of office will expire on June 30, 1971, nnd office number's 2, 4, and 0 to members whose terms will expire on June 30.19,73. (Added by State. 1968, Ch. 62.) EDUCATION CODE 1669 Compensation of Members 25413.3. Ench member of the governing board of the junior college d is tric t subject to Section 25413,1 shall receive as compensation a num per board meeting as determined by such governing board, provided that such num.shall not exceed one bonrd meeting per week. A member may bo paid for any meeting •when nbncnt If the bonrd by resolution duly adopted and npread upon ltn minutes, finds that nt the time of the meeting he is performing services outside the meeting for the junior college d is tric t, (Added by Stats. 1968, Ch. 883.) Provision for Separate Coverning of High School District and Junior College D istrict 25413.4. When a Junior college d is tric t in coterminous with a high school d is tr ic t, the governing bonrd of the high school d is tric t shall not constitute the governing board of tho junior college d is tr ic t. TIi o b o persons who on the effec tive date of th i s ’section nre serving aa members of the governing boards of both a junior college d is tric t and a coterminous high school d is tr ic t sh all, however, continue to so serve u n til the expiration of their present terms, pro vided they may on or nfter July 2, 1969 elect on which of the two boards they will continue to serve. Such election shall bo in writing, shnll specify the effective date, and shnll be filed with the county superintendent of schools hav ing jurisdiction over tho d is tr ic t. Those persons electing to withdraw ns members of c i t h e r tho governing board of the . junior college dlB.trict or the governing bonrd of the high Bchool d is tric t shdll continue to discharge the duties of the office from which they have withdrawn-untl1 their succes sors an such bonrd arc appointed pursuant to Sections 1162 or 25413.5 nnd have qualified, (Added by Stats. 1968, Ch. 274.) Disqualification for High School Coverning Bonrd 25413.45. No member of tho governing board of a Junior college d is tric t shall, during the term for which he was elected, be eligible to serve on the governing board of a high school d is tric t whose boundaries are coterminous with those, of the Junior college d i s t r i c t . (Added by Stats. 1969, Ch. 495.) Vacancies nn Junior College Boards 25413.5. Any vacancy on the governing" bonrd of a Junior c.ollcgc d is tric t shnll be filled by appointment of the remain-- ing members of the board for the remainder of the. uncxplrcd • term. If the remaining members of the bonrd fa ll to agree within 60 days, the county board of cducntlon shall appoint a person to fi ll the vacancy for the remainder of the unex- plrcd term, (Added by Stats. 1968, Ch. 100.) 1670 EDUCATION CODE Election of Governing Board Members 25113.6. It is the intent nnd purpose of the Legislature, by this section, to make more particular provision concerning the election specified in Section 25413.2 of governing bonrd mem* bcrs of a junior college district. After the effective date of this section, ench enndidnte for the positions to be filled may file a stntcmcnt indicnting his present occupational designation, in not more tlmu three words, or his office in accordance with the provisions of subdivision (n) of Section 10219 of the Elections Code, to be placed on the ballot. Such statement shall bn on a form provided by the city clerk or other person conducting the. election. The state* ment shall be filed with the city clerk or other person conduct ing the election not later than the day prior to the last day upon which the city clerk or other person conducting the elec tion may certify the nomination papers of candidates nnd the stntcmcnt shnll be filed under penalty of perjury. Tho city clerk or other person conducting- the election shall not be required to verify a candidate's occupational designation against his affidavit of registration. This provision of this section shnll remain in effect until July 1, I960, and shall have no force or effect thereafter. (Added by -Stats. 1909, Ch. 3. Effective from Janunry 31, 1969, until July 1, 1969.) Recall of Members of Board 25414. Governing board members may be recalled in tho manner provided in Sections 1261 to 1285, inclusive, except that where the governing board member, whose recall is being sought, is elected from a ward pursuant to Section 25410.5, the required number of signatures on the recall petition set forth in Section 1136 shall be obtained from only the electors in the'ward from which he was elected. Only those electors residing within the ward shall be eligible to vote in the recall election. (Added by Stats. 1963, Ch. 100. Amended by Stats. 1963, Ch. 912.) Polling Places 25414.5. In any junior college bonrd member election in- eluding recall elections, at lenst one polling place in each of the elementary nnd unified school districts located'in-the junior college district shall bo designated; provided, that, except when a consolidated election is being conducted in which the suspended district participates, a suspended ele mentary school district may bo combined with a contiguous clementnry school district for the purpose of the election and the voters of both shall vote nt the polling place designated in the active school district. I (Added by Stats. 3963, Ch. 100.) EDUCATION CODE 1671 Election of Separate Governing Board in Certain Districts 25414.6. When tho territory of a junior college district which was coterminous with the territory of a joint high school district, both districts being governed by the same city board of education, ccascs to he coterminous by virtue of the division of the territory of the high school district into four or more unified school districts, the formation of at lenst two of which became effective for all purposes on July 1, 1963, a separate governing board of five members for the junior college district shall be elected at large at an election, called by the county superintendent of schools having jurisdiction, to be held be tween March 30 and Juno 15 of 19G4, to take office on the first day of July following their election, with the same effect as prescribed by law for the first members of the governing board of a newly formed junior college district. (Added by Stats. 1963, ■ C h. 1466.) Organizational Meeting of Governing Board 25415. Within 20 days after the appointment of tho junior college board provided for by Section 25411.5, the county superintendent of schools having jurisdiction shall call a meet ing of the board by giving at least 10 days’ notice by regis tered mnil to ench member, for the purpose of organizing the junior college board. (Added by Stats. 1963, Ch. 100.) Election of Governing Board Officers 25415.5. At the meeting the junior college board Bhall organize by electing a president from its members and a secretary, and mny transact any other business relating to the affairs of tkc'juuior college district. (Added by Stats. 1963, Ch. 100.) Annual Organizational Meetings of Governing Board. 25416. The governing board of each junior college district shall hold nn annual organizational meeting on a day withip the period of July 1 to July 15, inclusive. Unless otherwise provided by rule of the governing board, the day nnd time of the annual meeting shall be selected by the bonrd nt its regulnr meeting held immediately prior to such July 1, nnd the board shnll notify the county superintendent of schools of the day and time selected. The secretary of the bonrd shnll, within 15 days prior to the dale of the annual meeting notify in writing nil members nnd mcmbers-elect of the date nnd time selected for the meeting. If the bonrd fails to select a dny nnd time for the meeting, the county superintendent of schools having jurisdiction over the district shnll, prior to July 1 and after the regular meet ing of the bonrd held immediately prior to July 1, designate the dny nnd time of the annunl ineoting. The dny designated shall be within the period of July 1 to July 15, inclusive. He 1672 EDUCATION CODB slinll notify in writing all members and mcmbcrs-elect of the date and time. At the annual meeting, the governing board of the junior college district shall organize by electing a president from its members nnd a secretary. (Added by Stats. 1963. Ch. 100: amended by Stats. 1963, Ch. 694, and by Stats. 1969, Ch. 623.) Article 2. Powers and Duties (Article 2 added by Stats. 1963, Ch. 100) Duty to Hold Regular Monthly Meetings 25420. Every junior college board shall hold regular monthly meetings at such times os may be provided in the rules and regulations adopted by them for their own govern ment, except that in junior college districts composed of two or more high school districts, the regular meetings may be quarterly. (Added by Stats. 1963, Ch. 100.) Special Meetings May Be Held 25420.5. Special meetings may be held at the call of the president of the board or upon a call issued in writing and signed by a majority of the members of the board, except that by unanimous consent a special meeting may be convened at any time. (Added by Stats. 1963, Ch. 100.) Date for Special Meeting 25421. The date set for special meetings shall be at least 24 hours subsequent to the completion of the call. (Added by Stats. 1963, Ch. 100.) Proper Business Before Special Meeting 25421.5. No business shall be transacted at a special meet ing other than that specified in the call, except that by unani mous consent any business matter may be transacted at any special meeting. . (Added by Stats. 1963, Ch. 100.) Meeting Place 25422. The junior college board shall meet in a public building which is owned or leased by the junior college district. (Added by Stats. 1963, Ch. 100} amended by Stats. 1967, Ch. 1358.) Nature of Powers and Duties of Boards 25422.5. Except as otherwise provided in this code, the powers and duties of junior college boards are such as are assigned to high school boards. (Added by Stats. 1963, Ch. 100.) APPENDIX C COVER LETTER ACCOMPANYING QUESTIONNAIRE 353 354] COLLEGE OF THE DESERT 43-500 Monterey Avenue Palm Desert, California 92260 Telephone (714) FI 6-8041 June 25, 1970 Dear Friend: ! i I ; I am presently engaged in a research effort designed to : analyze the library in the administrative and organization- j al structure of the public community college. The basic | purpose of the study is to note the similarities and dif- ! ferences of these libraries for future implications and to j ] report the results to those who might best benefit from the! knowledge. ; i I My questionnaire is being sent to the head librarians of j all regionally-accredited public community colleges in the ! ; United States. Would you please complete one of the iquestionnaires and return it in the stamped, seif-addressedj ! envelope by July 15, if possible. However, a later return j : will be usable. ! Thank you for your cooperation. Your professional courtesy! is much appreciated. | Sincerely yours, ! Everett L. Moore College Librarian Enclosure APPENDIX D QUESTIONNAIRE: THE LIBRARY IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE AND ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE OF THE AMERICAN PUBLIC COMMUNITY COLLEGE 355 THE LIBRARY IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE AND ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE OF THE AMERICAN PUBLIC COMMUNITY COLLEGE QUESTIONNAIRE * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * IMPORTANT DEFINITION Community college generally refers to a two-year, public institution of higher education which offers college/ university transfer courses, occupational education of a technical and semi-professional nature, evening classes, and classes for adults. If your institution does not function as a regionally accredited, public community college, please state this fact and return this questionnaire. _______________________ * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 1. When did the institution enroll 1. its first students? a. 1900-1909 a. b. 1910-1919 b. c. 1920-1929 c. d. 1930-1939 d. e. 1940-1949 e. f. 1950-1959 f. g- 1960-1969 g- How many full-time students were enrolled 2 . in October, 1969? (Note: please give your institution's interpretation of a full-time student.) ___________________ a. Less than 1,000 a. b. 1,000-2,499 b. c. ' 2,500-4,999 c. d. 5,000-7,499 d. e. 7,500-9,999 e. f. More than 10,000 f. 3. How many part-time students were enrolled 3. in October, 1969? (Note: please give your institution's interpretation of a part-time student.) ______________________ (Cont.) a. Less than 1,000 b. 1,000-2,499 c. 2,500-4,999 d. 5,000-7,499 e. 7,500-9,999 f. More than 10,000 If available for distribution, please send copies of the following: (Indicate by a check ( ) those being sent.) a. Your institution's latest catalog. b. Organizational chart of your institu tion which diagrams the college hier archy, including the library c. Organizational chart of the college library. d. Copy of your president's latest annual report. e. Copy of librarian's latest annual report. f. Copy of rules or regulations which govern the operation of the faculty library committee. Which of the following statements more closely describes the administrative control of your institution? (Please describe any variations on back of this page.) The college is operated: a. By a high school district. b. By a unified district, i.e., kinder garten through fourteenth grade. c. By an independent community college district. d. By a senior college or university. e. At the state level. f. Other (Specify:_____________________ ) The position of the head librarian in the administrative organization of the college is based upon which of the following: (Please check as many answers as are perti nent and describe relationships on the back of this page.) (Cont.) a. Historical custom b. Local practice c. Statute d. State law e. County law f. City law g. College Board of Trustees' policy h. Administrative fiat i. Other (Specify:___________________) To whom is the head librarian responsi ble in relation to library professional personnel? a. President b. Academic Vice-President c. Academic Dean d. Assistant Dean e. Personnel Director f. Director of Learning Resources g. Other (Specify:___________________) To whom is the head librarian responsible in relation to library clerical persons? a. President b. Academic Vice-President c. Academic Dean d. Assistant Dean e. Personnel Manager f. Business Manager g. Director of Learning Resources h. Other (Specify:______________________) Under present policy, the head librarian is selected and recommended for appoint ment by what person/body? (Check as many answers as are pertinent and describe relationships on back of this page.) a. Board of Trustees b. President c. Academic Vice-President d. Academic Dean e. Assistant Dean f. Academic Senate g* Faculty h. Special Selection committee i. Other (Soecifv: If you have checked Question 9h above. please answer Questions 10. 11, and 12; otherwise, proceed to Question 13. 10. How or by whom is the special selection 10. committee appointed or selected? a. Board of Trustees a. b. President b. c. Academic Vice-President c. d. Academic Dean d. e. Assistant Dean e. f. Academic Senate f. g. Faculty g. h. Other (Specify:_______________________) h. 11. What is the composition of the special 11. selection committee? (Please indicate the number of committee members in each category.) a. Administrators a. b. Faculty members b. c. Board of Trustees' members c. d. Librarians other than head librarian d. e. Library clerical staff, including library clerks f. Non-library clerical staff g. Students h. Other (Specify:______________________ ) (Total number of members on committee ) 12. Formal appointment is made by what 12. person or body? a. Board of Trustees a. b. President b. c. Academic Vice-President c. d. Academic Dean d. e. Assistant Dean e. f. Other (Specify:_______________________) f. 13. The head librarian is organizationally 13. responsible to which person, i.e., to whom does he report directly? a. Board of Trustees a. b. President b. c. Academic Vice-President c. d. Academic Dean d. e. Assistant Dean e. ?IQ H)® 13. (Cont.) f. Director of Learning Resources f. g. Other (Specify:____________________ ) g. 14. What is the administrative status 14. of the head librarian? a. Administrative officer of the college. a. b. Faculty member without adminis trative responsibility. b. c. Combination of administrative and faculty duties c. d. Has neither administrative nor faculty status. d. e. Other (Specify:____________________ ) e. 15. Please indicate the title of the 15. head librarian. a. Dean of the Library a. b. Assistant Dean of the Library b. c. Director of Learning Services c. d. Director of Library Services d. e. Head Librarian e. . f. College Librarian f. g. Librarian g. h. Other (Specify: ) h. 16. What audiovisual services are administer- 16. ed by the library? (Please check as many answers as are pertinent.) a. Phonorecords a. b. Films b. c. Film strips c. d. Picture file d. e. Microforms and readers/printers e. f. Transparencies f. g. Photocopy services g. h. Magnetic tapes h. i. Turntables i. j. Tape recorders/players j. k. Dial Access system k. 1. Photographic services 1. m. Graphics m. n. Realia n. o. Television o. p. Other (Specify: ) p. 17. If audiovisual services are available 17. but not administered by the library, by what departments are they administered? a. A separate audiovisual department located in library building. a. b. A separate audiovisual department located outside library building. b. c. An academic department (Please name: ) d. Other (Specify:____________ ) 18. What audiovisual services are administered 18. by a department other than the library? (Please check all pertinant answers.) a. Phonorecords b. Films c. Film strips c. d. Picture file c. e. Microforms and readers/printers e. f. Transparencies f. g. Photocopy services g. h. Magnetic tapes h. i. Turntables i. j. Tape recorders/players j. k. Dial Access system k. 1. Photographic services 1. m. Graphics m. n. Realia n. o. Television o. p. Other (Specify:______________________) p., 19. Faculty status may be subject to interpreta-19. tion; please check as many items as apply to your institution. a. Head librarian has faculty rank, e.g., Associate Professor. a. b. Paid according to faculty salary schedule. b. c. Eligible for sabbatical leave. c. d. Serves on faculty committees d. e . Attends faculty meetings e. f . Eligible for membership on Academic Senate. f . g. Released time for attending professional meetings. g* h. Travel allowance for attending professional meetingh. h. o ' P o, o 3621 I i. Expense account for attending professional meetings. i.# j. Same tenure privilege as faculty, k. Faculty retirement benefits 1. Other (Specify:__________________ ) 20. If the head librarian has faculty 20. rank, what is it? a. Professor b. Associate Professor c. Assistant Professor d. Instructor e. Lecturer (or faculty) but no actual rank f. Other (Specify:__________________ ) 21. During 1969, of which campus committees 21. was the head librarian a member? (Please include whether an ex-officio member or appointed permanently or yearly.) a. Academic regulations committee which has authority to make exceptions to publish regulations. b. Student life committee which reviews plans and proposals of student organizations. c. Educational policies committee which considers faculty and administrative relationships. d. Salary and welfare committee. e. Transfer curriculum committee which considers courses to receive trans fer credit from senior colleges. e._ f. Vocational curriculum committee which considers courses not clearly transferable to senior colleges. f.. g. Other (Specify:____________________) g.. 22. Is the head librarian consulted by the 22. administration before decisions are made which affect the operation or developments of the library? a. Always a. _ b. Usually b._ c. Sometimes c._ d. Seldom d._ e. Never e. a o o ' j d h» n > ' a o o * j u 23. 24. ' 25. 26. Which statement more closely describes the 23. administrative structure of your library? a. There is little or no organization or departmentalization: duties and responsibilities are assigned to the staff member who has the time or can perform them best. a. b. The traditional type of functional organization is used with separate departments of cataloging (including acquisitions), circulation, and refer ence (or by combining the latter two). b. c. Organization is by activity or process, e.g., photoduplication and book repair. c. d. Departments are organized by form of materials, e.g., separate divisions for serials, documents, and special collections. d. e. Library is organized into departmental libraries on the basis of subject. e. f. Library is organized into departmental libraries on the basis of geography. g. Other (Specify:______________________ Does the college have a faculty library committee? a. Yes b. No Which statement concerning the faculty library committee is most correct? It is: a. Primarily advisory. b. Primarily administrative; it makes decisions but leaves the execution to the head librarian. c. Primarily administrative; it makes decisions and executes these decisions. d. Other (Specify:_______________________) If the faculty library committee does not execute its decisions, to whom does the committee forward its recommendations? (Please check as many items as pertinent.) a. Board of Trustees b. President c. Academic Vice-President d. Academic Dean 26. a. b. c. d. ) g* 24. 25. 0 * 0 O * J D O ' P 26. (Cont.) e. Assistant Dean f. Faculty Senate g. Director of Learning Resources h. Head Librarian i. Other (Specify:_______________ ) 27. What is the composition of the faculty 27. library committee? (Please indicate the number of committee members in each category.) a. Administrators b. Faculty members c. Board of Trustees’ members d. Head librarian e. Librarians other than head librarian f. Library clerical staff, including library clerks g. Non-library clerical staff h. Students i. Other (Specify:___________________) 28. What are the qualifications for being 28. names to the faculty library committee? a. Interest in library matters and/ or library materials. b. Conscientious and dedicated committee worker. c. No discernible, pertinent qualifications. d. Ex-officio membership. e. There is a rotating membership. f. Other (Specify:__________________) 29. Is any attempt made to give balanced repre- 29. sentation on the faculty library committee to the various academic disciplines? a. Yes b. No 30. With reference to the naming of the members 30. of the faculty library committee, which statement more closely describes the prac tice at your college? Indicate in your answer the number appointed by each of the following, (if a combination of practices, please so indicate.) Members are named by: a. Board of Trustees a. D'PJ H > ( D a O b p itaOCTP H-D*«3l-h(0 30. 31. 32. 33. (Cont.) b. President b c. Academic Vice-President c d. Academic Dean d e. Assistant Dean e f . Head librarian f g* Faculty g h. Students h i . Clerical staff i j* Ex-officio membership ) (Please identify: 3 k. Volunteer membership (Please identify: ) k 1 . Other (Specify: ) 1 What is the length of term on the 31. faculty library committee? a. One year a. b. Two years b. c. Three years c. d. Four years d. e. Five years e. f. More than five years (Specify number of vears ) f. g- Permanent appointment g*. h. Indefinite h. i. Other (Specify: ) i. How many terms can a faculty 32. library committee member serve? a. One term a. b. Two terms b. c. Three terms c. d. Four terms d. e. Five terms e. f. More than five terms (Specify number of terms ) f. g* No limit g*. If the head librarian is a member of the 33. faculty library committee, which of the following statements are accurate? (Please check as many answers as are pertinent.) a. He is Chairman of the committee. a. b. He is Secretary of the committee. b. c. He is an ex-officio member. c. d. "He prepares the agenda for meetings. d. 33. (Cont.) e. He is an advisor to the committee. e f. He serves another office on the committee (please name it:__________ ) f 34. If the head librarian does not prepare 34. the agenda for the faculty library committee (i.e., you did not check Question 33d), who does? a. Chairman a b. Secretary b c. Other (Specify:______________________) c 35. How often does the faculty library 35. committee meet? a. Weekly a b. Semi-monthly b c. Monthly c d. Semi-yearly d e. Yearly e f. When necessary (this is usually _____ times per _____.) f g. Upon request g h. Never h i. Other (Specify:______________________) i 36. If the faculty library committee does 36. not meet at regularly scheduled times, at whose request does it meet? a. Chairman a b. Secretary b c. Head Librarian (if he is not Chairman or Secretary) c d. Member of the committee d e. Other (Specify: ) e 37. Are the minutes of the faculty 37. library committee circulated? a. Yes a b. No b 38. If Question 37 was answered in the affir- 38. mative, to whom are the minutes circula ted? (Check all pertinent items.) a. Committee members a b. Board of Trustees b c. College president c 38. 39. 40. 41. (Cont.) d. Other administrators (identify:______.) d. e. Faculty f. Students g. Clerical staff, including library clerks g. h. Library clerks but not other clerical staff h. i. Other (Specify:________________________ ) i. Please check as many of the following 39. items as are pertinent. a. Faculty library committee is governed by formal rules or regulations. a. b. Faculty library committee is governed by regulations which apply to all campus comittees. b. c. The faculty library committee has no formal regulations. c. In what areas does the faculty library 40. committee assist? a. Allocation of book funds. a. b. Book selection b. c. Budget preparation c. d. Library regulations d. e. Personnel matters e. f. Staff salaries f. g. Staff selection g. h. Planning new library building/remodeling h. i. Other (Specify:_________________________ ) i. The faculty library committee has taken an 41. active part in what developments during the years, 1965-1969? (Please note: 0 = no action, 1 = little action, 2 = moderate action, 3 - large action, 4 = very large action) a. Allocation of book funds a. b. Book selection b. c. Budget preparation c. d. Library regulations d. e. Personnel matters e. f. Staff salaries f. g. Staff selection g. h. Planning new library building/remodeling h. i. Other (Specify:_________________________ ) i. < D 42. Does the head librarian meet with the 42. faculty library committee concerning recommendations which are to be made to the President and/or Board of Trustees? a. Yes a. b. No b. 43. Does the faculty library committee serve 43. as liaison between the faculty and library staff? a. Yes a. b. No b. 44. If Question 43a was checked, in what 44. areas does it serve? a. Personnel matters a. b. Allocation of departmental budgets b. c. Preparation of library budget c. d. Library regulations d. e. Selection of books and other library materials e. f. Planning and pushing for new library building/remodeling f. g. Other (Specify:____________________) g. 45. In your opinion how successful has 45. the faculty library committee been in fulfilling its functions a. Outstanding a. b. Very good b. c. Good c. d. Fair d. e. Poor e. 46. Is the head librarian a member of an 46. administrative council or committee which is advisory to the college president? a. Yes a. b . No b. 47. If Question 46 was answered in the 47. affirmative, in what areas does the council advise the president? a. Only those areas requested by the president a. b. Areas determined by the council b. c. Personnel matters c. d. Curriculum matters d. 47. (Cont.) e. Educational policies and planning f. Student matters g. Administration of the college h. Budget matters i. Other (Specify:___________________ 48. Is there a Faculty Senate or academic council^ on the campus? a. Yes b. No 49. If Question 48 was answered in the affirmative is the head librarian a member? a. Yes - he is an ex-officio member. b. No - the library does not have representation. c. Only if he is elected in a faculty election. d. Not necessarily - the library may be represented by the election of another librarian. e. Not necessarily - the library is always represented but not necessarily by the head librarian. f. The head librarian and _____ (number) additional librarians are members of the Senate. 50. If the library is always represented on 50. the Faculty Senate (other than by ex-officio membership), how is the library representative chosen? a. By the faculty in an election b. By the library in an election c. Appointed by the head librarian d. Appointed by the college president e. Other (Specify:____________________ ) 51. Does the head librarian have responsi- 51. bility for the preparation of the library budget? a. Yes b. No ) 48 49 O * (OOiOO'PJ H i ( D C l o O' O' P H * O ' I Q (D 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. Whom does jthe head librarian consult 52. prior to the submission of the library budget? a. President a. b. Academic Vice-President b. c. Academic Dean c. d. Board of Trustees d. e. Department and/or Division Chairman e. f. Faculty f. g. Library department heads g. h. Student Council h. i. Other (Specify:_____________________ ) i. In your opinion has the college adminis- 53. tration taken meaningful positions which have resulted in significant advances in library services, facilities, or funds during the past five years? a. Yes b. No If Question 53 was answered in the 54. affirmative, please indicate these areas. (Check all pertinent items.) a. New library building/remodeled build ing and/or increased facilities. b. Increased book budget beyond inflation-caused increase. c. Additional library staff. d. Photocopying machine(s). e. Microfilm reader(s), reader-printer(s). f. Automation by means of data processing equipment. g. Dial-Access system h. Other (Specify:_______________________ ) Does the Board of Trustees have a 55. Library committee separate from the faculty library committee? a. Yes b. No If Question 55 was answered in the nega- 56. tive, how is the Board informed concern ing library plans, problems, and progress? a. Send minutes of faculty library committee to Board. a. o' p d * iq h » ( n a n o 1 p j o' p > 56. (Cont.) b. Head librarian meets regularly with Board. b. c. College president gives information to Board at his discretion. c. d. Academic Vice-President gives infor mation to Board at his discretion. d. e. Academic Dean gives information to Board at his discretion. f. Board receives no information. g. Other (Specify:_____________________ ) 57. Is there a student library committee? 57. a. Yes b. No 58. If Question 57 was answered in the 58. affirmative, what is the composition of the committee? (in your answers, please indicate the number of committee members in each category.) a. Elected in associated study body election. b. Appointed by student government officers. c. Appointed by college administration. d. Appointed by head librarian. e. Ex-officio member(s) (Identify: ) f. Other (Specify:_____________________ ) (Total number of members on committee _____) 59. What are the functions of the student 59. library committee? a. Help students know and understand library committee? b. Enforce library regulations. c. Perform public relations job for the library. d. Communicate needs of students to the library. e. Evaluate qualify of library service to students. f. Other (Specify:___________________) H»© a O O JP> H* f l > p. O O' P O' P I Q Hid) 60. Has a Friends of the Library group been 60. established to support the college library? a. Yes b. No 61. If Question 60 was answered in the 61. affirmative, who was instrumental in the establishment of the committee? a. College administration b. Head librarian c. Librarian(s) other than the head librarian d. Board of Trustees e. Interested citizens f. Students g* Alumni h. Other (Specify: ) The role of the community college library is multi-faceted as seen by the following statements. (Please rate: 0 = not an im portant role, 1 = little importance, 2 = moderately important role, 3 = very important role, 4 = major role) a. Meet the full curricular needs of all students. b. Keep faculty bibliographically current in their fields. c. Help faculty make original contribu tions to their disciplines within the purposes of the college. d. Include materials related to histori cal development of the college and the area served. e. Opportunity for each student to gain a well-rounded reading experience (additional to curricular emphases). f. Teach the use of books and libraries. g. Facilitate use of library materials by organization and service. g. h. Sponsor library-related activities to reach all students. h. i. Evaluate effectiveness of library program and services. i. j. Other (Specify:______________________) j. H» it ) CL 0 O' P EriQH^OftO c r pj 63. How well is your library fulfilling its role as discussed in each statement in Question 62? (Please rank: 0 = poorly, 1 1 = fairly, 2 = well, 3 = very well, 4 = excellently) a. Meet the full curricular needs of all students. b. Keep faculty bibliographically current in their fields. c. Help faculty make original contri butions to their disciplines within the purposes of the college. d. Include materials related to histor ical development of the college and the area served. e. Opportunity for each student to gain a well-rounded reading experience (additional to curricular emphases). f. Teach the use of books and libraries. g. Facilitate use of library materials by organization and service. h. Sponsor library-related activities to reach all students. i. Evaluate effectiveness of library program and services. j. Other (Specify:_____________________) APPENDIX E FOLLOW-UP POST CARD REQUESTING RETURN OF QUESTIONNAIRE 374 375 81-255 Sirocco Avenue Indio, California 92201 Probably your questionnaire is among those already returned. If so, thank you very much for your cooperation. Since every survey depends for its validity on the greatest number of individuals taking part, you can understand why I wish to make certain that your answers are included. If you have not yet had the opportunity to com plete and return the questionnaire, I trust that you will find it convenient to do so in the near future. If you have mislaid it, another copy is available upon request. Your cooperation is much appreciated. Sincerely yours 7/29/70 Everett Moore 1 APPENDIX F FOLLOty»IJP LETTER REQUESTING RETURN OF QUESTIONNAIRE 376 377 COLLEGE OF THE DESERT 43-500 Monterey Avenue Palm Desert, California 92260 Telephone: (714) 346-8041 August 26, 1970 Dear Friend: Probably you have already returned the questionnaire which I sent to you earlier this summer. The questionnaire was titled, The Library in the Administrative and Organiza tional Structure of the American Public Community College. If you did return it, I wish to express my appreciation for your cooperation. If you have been prevented from completing and returning it because of summer vacation, etc., I would be most grateful if it could be returned dur ing September. Another copy is enclosed for your conven ience in case your copy has been misplaced. Please return to this address: Everett L. Moore 3170 Garden Avenue San Jose, California 95111 Thank you for your cooperation and helpfulness. Sincerely yours, Everett L. Moore College Librarian ELM:ck

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Federal Aid To School Libraries; A Study Of The Title Ii, Phase Ii Program In California, 1965-1966

PDF

A Study Of Some Aspects Of The Publication Program Of The Government Of India, With Recommendations

PDF

Attitudes Of Academic Librarians In The Pacific Coast States Toward Library Technicians

PDF

A Study Of The Architectural Design Of Six University Library Buildings

PDF

A Study Of Human Response To California Library Organization And Management Systems

PDF

The influence of published reviews of sixteen millimeter motion pictures on film selection in public libraries with large film collections

PDF

An Analysis Of The Status Of Women As Full-Time Faculty Members In Coeducational Colleges And Universities Of California

PDF

California Public Libraries And The Cooperative Systems Concept: A Study with Recommendations

PDF

An Historical Analysis Of The Origin And Development Of The College Of Medical Evangelists

PDF

Relationships Among Rest, Reminiscence And Retention In Two Types Of Skill Learning

PDF

An Analysis Of Activities Of Selected Male Teacher Educators In The Area Of Physical Education

PDF

Grievance Procedures And Disciplinary Actions In Classified Personnel Administration In California Public Schools

PDF

A History Of Public School Organization And Administration In Orange County

PDF

Administrative Behavior Of Successful And Unsuccessful Athletic Directorsin Small Colleges And Universities

PDF

AN ANALYSIS OF THE RELATIONSHIP OF CERTAIN PERSONALITY FACTORS TO THE AMOUNT OF TIME ALLOTTED TO SPECIFIED PUBLIC SERVICE TASKS BY SELECTED SCHOOL LIBRARIANS.

PDF

The Stability Of The Self-Concept In Junior College Students

PDF

The Relationship Of Teacher Preparation And Experience To The Appraisal Of Classroom Effectiveness By The Principal

PDF

The Comparison Of Three Approaches To Teaching College Physical Educationin The Shaping Of Attitudes Toward Physical Activity

PDF

The Decision Process In College Attendance And Cognitive Dissonance

PDF

The Effectiveness Of A Simulation-Game Approach To The Teaching Of Budgetand Finance In Athletic Administration

Asset Metadata

Creator Moore, Everett Leroy (author)

Core Title The Library In The Administrative And Organizational Structure Of The American Public Community College

Degree Doctor of Philosophy

Degree Program Library Science

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag Education, administration,Library Science,OAI-PMH Harvest

Language English

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Advisor Boaz, Martha (committee chair), Hess, Edward J. (committee member), Kilpela, Raymond (committee member), Pullias, Earl Vivon (committee member)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c18-889688

Unique identifier UC11363330

Identifier 7331370.pdf (filename),usctheses-c18-889688 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier 7331370

Dmrecord 889688

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Moore, Everett Leroy

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA