College and Research Libraries B y W I L L I S K E R R t The Professor Looks at the Card Catalog Mr. Kerr, librarian of Claremont Col- leges, read this paper before the Los An- geles Regional Group of Catalogers, Pasadena, April 14, 1942, and before the Southern California Conference of Col- lege and University Librarians, Pasadena, May 4, 1942. A S A COLLEGE L I B R A R I A N , I a m t r y i n g to represent our friend, the college professor, w h o in himself and in his influ- ence is probably the largest user of the library card catalog. Indirectly I am speaking f o r his students. I thought I k n e w the mind of the pro- fessor, but to be sure of my ground I sent a questionnaire to some eighty-two teach- ers, deans, and presidents in nine institu- tions of southern C a l i f o r n i a . I chose names f r o m all departments of instruction and included younger as w e l l as older teachers. Forty-seven replies came b a c k : three presidents, six deans, thirty-five pro- fessors, and three librarians. T h e three librarians should be explained: one of the presidents and one of the deans promptly referred the questionnaire to his librarian. W h a t does a college have a librarian f o r ? O n e of the most suggestive answers came f r o m A n d r e w D . Osborn, of the H a r v a r d library, w h o is quoted later on. O n e of the presidents sent this r e p l y : " I am not competent to speak on the desirability of this or that card. I am one of those softies w h o , w h e n he w a n t s a book, has people w h o are wise and w h o bring him the book." I asked five main questions, breaking each into subtopics in order to obtain de- tails of opinion. T h e five main points w e r e : 1. For what do you usually consult your library card catalog? 2. D o you consult the subject cards? 3. D o you know how much it costs to catalog a book? 4. W h a t do you tell your students about their use of the library catalog? 5. In short, if you were doing it, how would you catalog your college (or univer- sity) library? I am t r y i n g not to take sides in the moot points, but you w i l l judge my point of v i e w f r o m some of the questions I sub- mitted. 1. Uses of the Card Catalog O b v i o u s l y , a bull's-eye w a s scored by the first query: " D o you usually consult your library card catalog in order to ascertain whether your library has a certain book and, if so, its call n u m b e r ? " Forty-six replied enthusiastically " y e s . " Possibly the very unanimity should have a meaning for us. Query: " T o obtain f u l l name of author and w h e n he l i v e d ? " Sixteen say " y e s , " five say " n o , " four say "occasion- a l l y " or " s e l d o m . " Six indicate that dates of birth and death do not signify. Query: 134 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES " T o obtain exact title of b o o k ? " T h i s drew twenty-four affirmative answers, t w o negative, and seven qualified answers. O n e professorial friend remarks about author's f u l l name, dates, and exact title of book: " I rarely look in catalog for these two, but they should be s u p p l i e d — in case." Query: " T o v e r i f y place and publication date of b o o k ? " " Y e s , " eight- een. " N o , " two. " S e l d o m " or other qualifications, five. O n e answer fancies especially the place of publication. Query: " T o learn whether the book was published in a certain series?" T h e an- swers to this grieve me, because I dote on series entries. O n l y three say " y e s , " three are doubtful, and ten say positively " n o . " Query: " T o obtain f u l l description of book: number of pages, maps, illustrations, size (in centimeters or inches ? — I put that in wickedly, thinking I w o u l d get a rise from more than one p r o f e s s o r — b u t only one indicated preference f o r inches!), table of contents, edition?" T h i s "bibliographi- cal embroidery," as M r . B o w k e r called it, is very dear to me, but only six of my friends value it, one is doubtful, one w a n t s number of pages only, t w o value table of contents, while ten coldly say " n o . " I can't believe they all mean it. I feel a little better about my next query: " D o you value notes (such as 'first e d i t i o n ' — o n l y t w o value t h a t — o r 'at head of title') or notation of 'bibliography, p. . . . ' ? " Fourteen are on my side w i t h " y e s " votes, nine say " n o , " and five ask specially for notation of bibliography. Query: " D o you like to k n o w w h o published the b o o k ? " T w e n t y - f o u r say " y e s , " seven answer "oc- casionally" or " s e l d o m , " four don't care. I might have k n o w n the answer to my query: " D o you usually look for a book by its a u t h o r ? O r by its t i t l e ? " Forty-three say "by a u t h o r , " ten "by title," one neither. N o w it w i l l be noted that, statistically speaking, from these answers, the average professor uses the card c a t a l o g : I. T o ascertain whether the library has a certain book and w h e r e it is shelved; only a minority w a n t s f u l l name and dates of author. 2. Place and date of publication get in only by a narrow squeak. Pub- lisher is wanted. T h e s e w o u l d give us on a card only author, title, place, date, and publisher. Subject cards are taken up in the next series of questions. B u t some of the answers do not arrange themselves by yes or no. T h e y need to be quoted: O n e w e l l - k n o w n professor of English says his use of the catalog "de- pends upon my f o r g e t t e r y . " A n o t h e r equally w e l l - k n o w n professor of English confesses: " I usually get place and publi- cation date, series note, bibliographical description, and notes ( w h e n I need them) from the sources; but the catalog should supply the i n f o r m a t i o n — i n case. In all such matters I tend to make the catalog an insurance p o l i c y — m y recourse if other things f a i l . " A college president asks for book evaluation in the catalog, t h u s : " A consensus of authoritative value j u d g - ments w o u l d be helpful to students w h o have limited knowledge of bibliography. T h e y tend to 'believe' printed matter and need guidance of a critical sort." A pro- fessor of history says the "entry of series under easy cross references is a problem, especially hard-to-find large series, such as C a l i f o r n i a state papers, inedited docu- ments, etc." A professor of public ad- ministration bluntly remarks: " I use the catalog only to secure the book. P r e f e r to get other data from the book itself." W h a t if the book is out, f r i e n d ? B u t your remark reminds me of the quip at- tributed to Archibald C a r y Coolidge, of H a r v a r d ; " W h y should the card catalog MARCH', 1943 135 describe the book? T h e library has i t . " A wise over-all point of v i e w is D r . Osborn's summary of the uses of the card c a t a l o g : " T h e official uses are for book selection, order w o r k , cataloging, inter- library loan, etc. F o r readers' purposes, the use by students is lessened because of reserved reading, the browsing room, the new book shelves, the house ( d o r m i t o r y ) libraries, etc. F a c u l t y and research w o r k - ers have access to stacks, and main use of the catalog is for locating k n o w n books." 2. Subject Cards T h e query, " D o you consult the subject c a r d s ? " brought twenty-one affirmative answers, ten negatives, and three quali- fied. In passing, it w i l l be noted that many of these queries are not answered by all our professorial f r i e n d s : in this case only twenty-one of forty-seven are definite in their use of subject c a r d s ; ten do not use them, three say " r a r e l y " or " s e l d o m , " and thirteen do n o t . a n s w e r — w h y ? T h e next query w a s : " D o you find it easy to hit upon the subjects used for the books in which you are interested?" Surprisingly, fifteen say " y e s , " fourteen say " n o , " and six answer "not a l w a y s , " " v a r i e s , " "sel- d o m , " etc. Similarly, the query: " D o you find the subjects are up to d a t e ? " is an- swered affirmatively by thirteen, nega- tively by ten, and qualified by three. I w o u l d call this a vote of lack of confidence: thirteen to thirteen, w i t h twenty-one not voting. C o u p l e that w i t h the next query: " D o you use your o w n bibliographies rather than the library subject c a t a l o g ? " A f f i r m a t i v e answers are thirty-seven, w h i l e only seven report preference for the subject catalog. T h e g r o w i n g academic preference for subject bibliographies is nicely illustrated by a comparison of the first ( 1 9 2 9 ) and second ( 1 9 4 2 ) editions of a standard w o r k in social studies: G e o r g e A . L u n d b e r g . Social Research. N . Y . , Longmans. E d . 1, 1929. E d . 2, 1942. T h e "selected references" in the first edition occupy forty-six pages ( 3 2 5 - 7 0 ) . T h e y are re- placed in the second edition by "suggestions for further s t u d y " (critical annotations) at the end of each of the twelve chapters, usually a page or less, plus a "bibliography of bibliographies" ( t w o p a g e s ) . M o r e - over the author remarks in his introductory c h a p t e r : For the general bibliography and appendi- ces of the first edition I have substituted at the end of each chapter specific suggestions for further study of the subject under con- sideration. T h e enormous increase during the past decade makes it necessary for the student in the future to re;ly on annotated bibliographies indicating which studies are likely to contain material relevant to a par- ticular inquiry. On the subject of attitude research alone, for example, there appeared in periodicals in English, during the years I937~39 inclusive, some two hundred titles, not counting relatively inaccessible theses and papers and excluding all studies having no bearing on methodology. Annotated bib- liographies for the field have, fortunately, become increasingly available, enabling stu- dents to go more directly to the relevant sources. A bibliography of such bibliogra- phies, aggregating many thousands of titles, is appended to the present volume. A g a i n , some of the answers on subject cards must be quoted to get at their m e a t : A professor of psychology says subjects are not up to date, for "some antiquarian in L i b r a r y of Congress must choose them." A professor of economics says, " M y ap- proach is through subjects more frequently than persons or titles." Similarly, a dean of education reports: " M o r e frequently than any other use, I consult the catalog to find w h a t w e have concerning a subject or field. T h a t is, my needs are more often than not bibliographical." O n e answer 136 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES declares, " S u b j e c t cards should be set up even though the subjects at times only approximate student interests." A pro- fessor of English says it this w a y : " I t seems to me that subject cataloging has been less helpfully done than any other kind. So often in past years did I fail to get relevant information and guidance speedily that I tend to ignore this side of the catalog except in a real pinch. T h e n I expect to make a job of i t . " A librarian replies, " F o r our particular library I favor more analytics for parts of books and f e w e r general indefinite headings. M o r e cross references, especially from compound names." A historian says present subject headings are not up to d a t e : " T h e y served in the days of economic determinism and political emphasis. T h e y are entirely in- adequate for social, intellectual, and re- ligious aspects, w h i c h are now equally important." I conclude that w e have enough source material in these answers for several head- aches and for a full-scale investigation of subject cataloging. 3. Cost of Cataloging I thought w e might get some help on the age-long question of cataloging costs. Innocently, I asked: " D o you know how much it costs to catalog a b o o k ? " F o u r answer simply, " y e s " — b u t do not tell me h o w much. T w e n t y - o n e answer " n o . " O n e says, " N o t e x a c t l y . " " A m not con- cerned." O n e says, " O f t e n as much as the book costs." O n e says, "twenty-five to f i f t y cents." T h r e e say, " f i f t y cents or m f r e . " T w o say "seventy-five cents." O n e says, " A b o u t f i f t y cents to one dollar, I believe." T w o say "one d o l l a r . " N o - tice that only ten of thirty-seven answers give any figure. D r . Osborn says H a r v a r d costs are gross $1.50, actual $1.00,. less valuable books f i f t y - t w o Cents. T h e query, " H o w much do you think your institution is justified in spending for cata- l o g i n g ? " brought an array of suggestions. Seven say, " N o more than necessary." T w o say, " N o t over f i f t y cents." T h r e e say, " M o r e than at present." O n e says, " F e w e r books w e l l cataloged." O n e says, " E n o u g h to avoid making the library a cemetery." O n e says, " A s k the librari- ans." T h r e e say cataloging is indispens- able, whatever the cost. E i g h t are f r a n k l y puzzled to answer. Evidently, they want a catalog. I next asked, " D o e s your li- brary catalog become obsolescent?" F o u r reply " y e s , " eleven " n o , " six say "yes, in spots," or " s o m e w h a t . " W h e n I asked, " I s the obsolescence of the catalog or of the books?" nine said of the catalog, w h i l e seventeen put the blame on the books. M y last query under cataloging costs was poorly phrased. I asked, " I f ten col- lege and university libraries in southern C a l i f o r n i a each buy Davies, Mission to Moscow, do you think each library should do its o w n cataloging for i t ? " In the first place, several of our professorial friends do not think any library should buy that book! B u t I had in mind centralized or regional cataloging, not simply the use of L . C . printed cards, which most of the answers urged. Because the question was not clear, I think the answers do not sig- n i f y much. N i n e answer " y e s , " probably meaning by the use of L . C . cards; w h i l e sixteen say " n o , " probably meaning that L . C . cards should be used. O f course, they assume that w h e n you have the printed card all the cataloging is done. O n e answer is typical of several w h i c h show that to many cataloging and classifi- cation are the same t h i n g : " I f cataloging is proving too expensive w h y not use classi- fications as given on L i b r a r y of Congress MARCH', 1943 13 7 cards since 1936 a p p r o x i m a t e l y ? " A n - other answer shows some analysis has been m a d e : " I n the l o n g run, I f a v o r the efficiency of the local unit, w h a t e v e r it is." A n d someone else asks, " D o e s L . C . really pay in a small l i b r a r y ? " Several suggest printing of cards by publishers. T h r e e of the answers seem to catch my idea. O n e says, " N o t if a central cata- loging office could be a r r a n g e d . " A n o t h e r says, " N o t if a unified system w o u l d be cheaper and not much less expeditious." Still another says "each library should no more do its o w n cataloging than each uni- versity should print its o w n books." I venture to put a surmise and a prob- lem in arithmetic before y o u : If there are one hundred libraries in southern C a l i - fornia each buying the same one hundred books annually, that is ten thousand vol- umes to be cataloged, either w i t h or w i t h - out L . C . cards. If each library spends f i f t y cents per volume for labor cost of cataloging, that is five thousand dollars f o r cataloging the same one hundred books. If w e had a regional cataloging bureau, h o w much w o u l d it cost to deliver one hundred sets of cards ready to file, w i t h call numbers, subject headings, added entries, and a l l ? W o u l d you use such cards if they cost you twenty-five or thirty cents (that is a pure guess by me) instead of your present cataloging cost? O r are w e all f o l l o w i n g that will-o'-the-wisp, that the cataloging of an additional one hun- dred books does not really cost us any- thing? 4. What Are Students Told? T h e next query was, " W h a t do you tell your students about their use of the library c a t a l o g ? " E l e v e n f r a n k l y answer, " N o t h - i n g . " ( I w a s surprised at that.) H o w - ever, one answer is: " I try to encourage all possible use of the catalog, f r o m all possible angles, such as subject references, accuracy in listing, preparation of bibliog- raphies, e t c . " A n o t h e r answers sugges- t i v e l y : " I tell them to w o r k through sub- jects, bibliographies, other w o r k s of men thus discovered, other related aspects of subject, etc. I differentiate public docu- ment, journal, and periodical material." H o w much more helpful are either of those, than this: " I tell them mostly that they should look books up by author and that the subject catalog is likely to be treacherous and cannot be really satisfac- t o r y , " or this: " I tell them that they can't find much by the c a t a l o g . " Query: " I n your opinion, for w h a t does the average student use the c a t a l o g ? " O f course, there are the expected answers: develop bibliographies, check references, expand material, etc. O n e doubting T h o m a s says the average student's use of the catalog is "superficial hunting of some- thing to cram o n . " A n o t h e r says, " I fancy students often try (and usually unsuccess- f u l l y ) to use the subject i n d e x . " A n o t h e r says the same: " T h e average student looks up subjects in the subject catalog. H e is often unsuccessful even though the books are in the l i b r a r y . " N o t so gloomy is this: " T h e student uses the catalog as a substi- tute f o r getting information f r o m the s t a f f ; also to make out bibliographies for term papers (usually without discrimina- tion) . " A n o t h e r opines that students "use the catalog to find books but even more to look up subjects. T h e y should use bibli- ographies, but they w o n ' t . " A n d finally here is this o n e : " T h e student uses the catalog to see whether the book is in the library, to get call number. Some use the subject index, but too much guessing is 138 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES involved in trying to discover under w h a t subject a book w i l l be catalogued." 5. How Would You Catalog Your Li- brary? H o p i n g to get some come-backs, I asked, " I n short, if you were doing it, h o w w o u l d you catalog your college (or univer- sity) l i b r a r y ? " I got the come-backs. First, there were eight w h o said the pres- ent method is O . K . T w o said, " L . C . exclusively," one said, " A b o l i s h D e w e y "and use L . C . , " another, " O u r old D . C . catalog w a s very satisfactory." ( Y o u see, cataloging and classification are synony- mous.) O t h e r answers a r e : "Separate author and subject cards. . . . " " M u c h more emphasis on subject catalog. . . . " " G e n e r o u s subject entries, simple entry. . . . " " B y title and author " " C o m - pletely. . . . " " A special subject catalog. . . . " " B y m a j o r schools and departments. . . . " " G e t publisher to furnish cards." Several are sure in a different w a y : " I w o u l d n ' t . . . . " " N o t h i n g under heaven could induce me. . . . " " W o u l d refer it to M r . K e r r . . . . " " I ' d commit suicide. . . " H e a v e n s , n o ! . . . " " T h i s is an easy question!" Some of the more definite suggestions a r e : M o r e breakdown of general subjects, with classifications more nearly in accordance with ends being served by curriculum and research. I'd leave it to those who are trained to know how best to do it (known as passing the buck) ! Catalogs seem to me marvelous in their information and arrangement and cross cataloging. I don't see it as a problem, for our people are doing it very well for my purposes. Use L . C . cards as we do but put books into circulation more rapidly by use of tem- MARCH', 1943 porary slip in the catalog. Use more head- ings in the catalog, with duplicate cards in each good place. I wouldn't t r y : T h i s is a matter for library experts. T h e y would know how best to make the library available as an important teaching tool and keep students interested in the library. M a k e generous topical filings. Eliminate all information except name, title, publisher, edition, and subject. In addition to the present general catalog, I would have brief catalogs of books desired according to courses and I would have these books grouped together on shelves accessible to students. By subjects and fields, but the greatest shortcoming of the present system is the placement of books [classification] by the ordinary meaning of title rather than by its content. T h i s is particularly serious in psy- chology. T h i s is a technical question and the lay- man and the mere user of a library is out of place to speak with any authority. I be- lieve, however, that I would not have my catalog differ from the established practice, since we ought to be at home in any library after we have learned the setup of one. Doing otherwise would be like changing the alphabetic order of a dictionary—chaos would result. About as now (Library of Congress sys- tem, modified), but: 1. M a k e subject entries under geographic names for such things as trade, sports, churches and religion, transportation, educa- tion, music, literature, etc. etc., so far as they directly apply to one region. 2. Analyse all biographies under at least one subject, often two. 3. T o save money (only), eliminate detailed collation. 4. Create division, "Early works to [1800] for social as well as natural sciences." In this connection, the article by N . P . Barksdale, " F a c u l t y Cooperation w i t h the L i b r a r y S t a f f , " 1 among other methods sug- 1 Journal of Higher Education 13:146-49, M a r c h 1 9 4 2 . 139 gests that members of instructional staff collaborate regularly and continuously w i t h the library catalogers in the selection and revision of subject headings, classifi- cation, and the like. A n d r e w D . Osborn's method of catalog- ing his college library w o u l d b e : 1. Put the files of books for reserved reading in a visible index and classify them for that collection. Otherwise let the [re- served] books go uncataloged. 2. Follow circulation needs more closely, e.g., by keeping many variant editions as copies. 3. Keep centralized order and catalog cards for the departmental libraries but do their cataloging as simply and naturally as they now do. 4. Catalog less valuable books more eco- nomically. Keep books of little value out of the regular classifications. Plan the classifications so that one class could be closed after a certain time and a new class started. 5. Leave very many documents uncata- loged. 6. M a k e more title entries than we have done, likewise more subject references. 7. Omit authority cards in general. 8. W o r k cooperatively, but not blindly. 6. Would You Rather Have "Your" Books Together? F o r a real flier, I added one postscript query: " O r w o u l d you rather have all 'your' books in one room and have no card c a t a l o g ? " I deserved the answers I got, but among them are some good thoughts. A m o n g the obvious answers w e r e : " I m - possible under many conditions and unde- sirable under all c o n d i t i o n s . . . " W o u l d make library almost useless. . . " N o t much. . . "Impossible. . . . " " Y e s , but not practical. . . . " " Q u i t e acceptable to me. . . . " " W h a t do you m e a n — ' y o u r s ' ? " " N o , w e ' d be in an a w f u l j a m . . . . " " C h a o t i c — h e a v y loss of books. . . . " " A selfish desire. . . . " " V e r y definitely not. . . . " "Possible only w i t h w h o l e culture periods" (he k n e w w h a t I had in m i n d ) . H e r e are several of the more meaning- f u l a n s w e r s : I like the plan of having books widely needed for a course segregated temporarily where students can get at them with a mini- mum of trouble and where students can easily perceive the large nature and scope of the authorities or sources. ( N o t e : T h a t does not mean to "put them on reserve.") Heavens, no! I want range. I'd want books from "other" fields continually. No, but would keep them in the same place. T h e r e is too much shifting from section to section. Students complain that when they have learned location in stacks, the books are all changed around the next time they come to the shelves. Theoretically, but fear there is too much overlapping territory between "my" terri- tory and "yours." N o t when dealing with collections the size of ours, but I do believe in a wise decentrali- zation which can exploit the methods of the special library. I would arrange a library by major schools or departments—small, easily avail- able. T h e old library at Pomona or Am- herst or Smith was perfect—for me. T h e grandest library I have used is the one at Brookings: carefully chosen books, on shelves available to everybody, no librarian, self-charging. But that was a small group of mature students! W e l l , if we adopted an intelligent system, we would have small groups and perhaps more intelligent stu- dents. In Summary I believe the foregoing is a fair cross section of the professorial mind as regards c a t a l o g i n g : 1. H e w a n t s a good library, w e l l cata- loged on standardized lines. 2. H e w a n t s a simple catalog. 3. H e w a n t s plenty of subject cards, but apparently not the present sort. 140 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES 4- H e is inclined to think that students do not get too much help from the present catalogs. 5. H e believes in cooperative, central- ized cataloging. 6. H e is not particularly concerned about the cost of cataloging, if it is w e l l done. 7. H e believes in his library staff. Some of My Own Thoughts 1. I believe w e should take steps to have our teaching and institutional ad- ministrative staffs understand more f u l l y w h a t cataloging involves and w h a t it costs. T h e legend of "enormous" or " f a b u l o u s " costs, which unhappily exists, should be brought to earth. T h e cost of acquiring a book, even the average cost of the book itself, plus the cost of cataloging (perhaps a total of five d o l l a r s ) , should be brought into comparison w i t h the unit-hour cost of instruction of a student (somewhere round five or six dollars an hour, or one hundred and f i f t y to t w o hundred dollars per y e a r ) . 2. W e should make up our minds w h a t the catalog is for. I believe, for the ordi- nary run-of-the-mill book, the catalog is a finding list, pure and simple. F o r the unusual (or rare) book, the catalog is also partially a bibliographical tool. W e should take steps to streamline the han- dling and the cataloging of the ordinary book. A n d w e should d r a w the line somewhere as to w h a t constitutes a book requiring detailed, specialized handling in the acquisition and cataloging depart- ments. 3. I am inclined to think that classifi- cation is partly responsible for our cata- loging problems. Some evidence of the extent of the problem of classification in the minds of catalogers and classifiers is the analysis by M r . T a u b e r , of the U n i - versity of Chicago libraries, of the topics treated in the first ten volumes of the Catalogers' and Classifiers' Yearbook:2 classification leads the list w i t h eighteen papers, then f o l l o w centralization and co- operation, nine, subject headings, nine, history and survey, eight, cataloging pro- cedures, seven, costs, seven, organization and administration, six, tributes (to great catalogers), five, union catalogs, f o u r , arrangement of catalogs, four, handling of special material, four, abstracts of theses (summaries), four, rules, three, and twenty other subjects, twenty-seven. 2 T a u b e r , M a u r i c e F . " R e v i e w of Catalogers' and Classifiers' Yearbook." Library Quarterly 12:297- 300, A p r i l 1942. MARCH', 1943 141