College and Research Libraries Review Articles Core of Education for Librarianship The Core of Education for Librarianship. A Report of a Workshop held under the auspices of the Graduate Library School of the University of Chicago, August 1 0 - 1 5 , 1953. Ed. by Lester Asheim. Chicago, American Library Association, 1954. 68p. planographed. $ 1 . 5 0 . During the years, roughly, between 1946 and 1950 the faculty of the Graduate Li- brary School of the University of Chicago addressed itself seriously to the problem of the core curriculum, and even made some considerable progress in defining the "core" and developing in fairly precise terms its course content. Thus the announcement, in the late winter of 1953, that the School would sponsor a workship, at the University of Chicago, on "The Core of Education for Librarianship" came as a distinct surprise to many who, because of the general acceptance in principle of this "core concept" by most of the library schools, had begun to regard the idea of the "core" as no longer a particularly timely topic for discussion. But whatever the reasons that lay behind the promotion of the Workshop, the dean of the Graduate Library School invited some sixty individuals, representing a wide variety of professional library activities, including many engaged in library education, to a five- day discussion period, to consider "whether the core concept has validity for library edu- cation and if so, what the content of such a core should be." (p.i) The group assembled in Ida Noyes Hall from August 10 to 14, I953- They did not reconvene on Saturday, the 15th, as had originally been planned. Prior to the opening of the Workshop, each registrant was "sent a packet of informa- tional materials pertinent to the specific area of his interest. These materials contained summaries of statistical data and other fac- tual information from a variety of published sources. The data had no official status in the Workshop but were provided as back- ground information which participants would have in common. It was possible, through this procedure, to devote the entire period of the W o r k s h o p to a discussion of the central problem without having to divert time to the gathering of extant facts and findings on which the discussions could be based." (p.ii) T h e s e materials w e r e sent to the registrants only a f t e r each had indicated "the area in which [his] m a j o r interest lay and [ w a s ] assigned to the committee which could most f r u i t f u l l y utilize [his] experience and inter- ests." (p.ii.) T h e opening day of the W o r k s h o p w a s spent in plenary session, at which time the participants defined the " c o r e " as " t h a t part of the total curriculum which must be mas- tered by everyone, no matter w h a t specializa- tion he aims f o r , or at w h a t level it is t a u g h t . " ( p . 1 . ) D u r i n g this first day the W o r k s h o p also considered the definition of a profession, and concluded by accepting that of Ralph T y l e r , who identifies two m a j o r attributes of a profession: ( a ) the "existence of a recognized code of ethics," and ( b ) the possession of a "body of principles," upon which its techniques of operation are based, ( p . 3 ) In presenting the results of this first day of deliberation the author of the sum- mary report here reviewed is c a r e f u l to point out that "the W o r k s h o p w a s established without preconceptions [respecting the exist- ence of a c o r e ] . Its objective w a s not to prove that a core exists, but to determine whether a core exists or not." ( p . i ) B u t the group soon discovered that, if it accepted the definition of T y l e r , it must either accept the existence of a core of common theoretical knowledge, or reject professional status f o r librarians, (pp.4-5) H a v i n g completed its preliminary w o r k , the W o r k s h o p dispersed into five separate "com- mittees," the personnel of which had been determined in advance according to the p a r - ticular interests of the registrants. T h e s e Committees w e r e denominated, respectively: 1 . L i b r a r y T r a i n i n g at the U n d e r g r a d u t e L e v e l 2. L i b r a r y T r a i n i n g at the G r a d u a t e L e v e l 3. T r a i n i n g f o r L i b r a r y W o r k with C h i l - ren and Y o u n g People 4. T r a i n i n g f o r Librarianship in Special Subject F i e l d s 348 COI.LEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES 5 . T r a i n i n g f o r G e n e r a l L i b r a r y P r a c t i c e . T h e C o m m i t t e e s v a r i e d in s i z e f r o m n i n e t o s e v e n t e e n , t h e l a r g e s t b e i n g t h a t f o r W o r k w i t h C h i l d r e n a n d Y o u n g P e o p l e , a n d t h e s m a l l e s t , s t r a n g e l y e n o u g h , b e i n g t h a t c o n - c e r n e d w i t h G e n e r a l L i b r a r y P r a c t i c e . T h e t a s k a s s i g n e d t o e a c h w a s t o " d e f i n e t h e c o r e c o n t e n t in t e r m s of i t s o w n p a r t i c u l a r p r o b - l e m s . " ( p . 9 ) W h e n t h e W o r k s h o p r e c o n v e n e d in p l e n - a r y s e s s i o n it w a s d i s c o v e r e d t h a t t h e r e w a s r e l a t i v e l y c o m p l e t e a g r e e m e n t a m o n g t h e f i v e C o m m i t t e e s on t h e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of s e v e n " c o r e a r e a s , " v i z : ( 1 ) T h e L i b r a r y a n d S o c i e t y , ( 2 ) P r o f e s s i o n a l i s m , ( 3 ) M a t e r i a l s , ( 4 ) S e r v - i c e s , ( 5 ) A d m i n i s t r a t i o n , ( 6 ) C o m m u n i c a t i o n , a n d ( 7 ) R e s e a r c h . B u t t h e d e s c r i p t i o n s of t h e s e a r e a s w e r e f o u n d " t o b e so g e n e r a l a s t o b e m e a n i n g l e s s f o r a n y c u r r i c u l u m p l a n n e r s w h o m i g h t w i s h t o r e f e r t o t h e W o r k s h o p r e c - o m m e n d a t i o n s f o r g u i d a n c e . " ( p . 1 4 ) T h e r e - f o r e , t o s a v e i t s d e l i b e r a t i o n s f r o m c o m p l e t e v a c u i t y , t h e W o r k s h o p v o t e d t o r e c o n s t i t u t e c o m p l e t e l y i t s c o m m i t t e e s t r u c t u r e t o " r e p r e - s e n t " e a c h of t h e c o r e a r e a s ( p l u s a C o m m i t - t e e o n I m p l e m e n t a t i o n t o r e c o m m e n d o v e r a l l m e t h o d , a n d a D r a f t i n g C o m m i t t e e ) in o r d e r t o s t a t e in m o r e s p e c i f i c t e r m s w h a t t h e c o n - t e n t of t h e s e a r e a s s h o u l d c o v e r . " ( p . 1 4 ) T h e r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s w h i c h w e r e f i n a l l y a p p r o v e d b y t h e W o r k s h o p a t i t s c o n c l u d i n g p l e n a r y s e s s i o n a r e s u m m a r i z e d in t h e l a s t c h a p t e r of t h i s r e p o r t , a n d a r e h e r e p r e s e n t e d in o u t l i n e : I . T h e S t u d y of the L i b r a r y a n d S o c i e t y , a n d t h e i r R e l a t i o n s h i p to E a c h O t h e r a. S o c i a l institutions of w h i c h the l i - b r a r y is one b. K i n d of society w h i c h g i v e s r i s e to the l i b r a r y a s a s o c i a l institution c. F u n c t i o n s of the l i b r a r y in society d. C o m m u n i t y b a s i s of o r i g i n a n d s u p - p o r t of l i b r a r i e s e. I n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p of l i b r a r i e s to o t h e r f o r c e s a n d a g e n c i e s in the c o m m u n i t y f . S o c i a l p r o b l e m s a n d t r e n d s a f f e c t i n g the l i b r a r y g . T h e l i b r a r y a s a d y n a m i c f o r c e in a d e m o c r a c y h. P o s i t i o n of l i b r a r y science a m o n g the s o c i a l sciences I I . T h e M e a n i n g a n d C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of P r o - f e s s i o n a l i s m a . T h e c h a r a c t e r of a p r o f e s s i o n , b a s e d upon the T y l e r d e f i n i t i o n b. T h e c o m p a r i s o n of l i b r a r i a n s h i p w i t h o t h e r p r o f e s s i o n s c. T h e l i b r a r i a n ' s p r o f e s s i o n a l r e s p o n s i - b i l i t i e s I I I . T h e I n t e r p r e t a t i o n , A p p r e c i a t i o n , E v a l u a - tion, Selection, a n d U s e of B o o k s , M a t e r i - als, a n d S o u r c e s a. O r g a n i z a t i o n a n d o p e r a t i o n of the book t r a d e b. P r i n c i p l e s a n d p r a c t i c e s in the e v a l u - ation a n d selection of m a t e r i a l s , a n d m e t h o d s of b u i l d i n g a collection f o r a g i v e n g r o u p of u s e r s c. K n o w l e d g e a n d j u d g m e n t in the use of the b a s i c b i b l i o g r a p h i c a n d r e f e r - ence tools in book a n d non-book m a - t e r i a l s d. I n t e r p r e t a t i o n of l i b r a r y m a t e r i a l s to the end of h e l p i n g the u s e r e. O v e r v i e w of s t a n d a r d a n d c u r r e n t books in s u b j e c t f i e l d s , s u i t a b l e f o r r e a d e r s at all l e v e l s f . A n a w a r e n e s s a n d an a p p r e c i a t i o n of the v a r i o u s t y p e s of non-book m a - t e r i a l s I V . T h e O r g a n i z a t i o n a n d C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of I n t e r n a l a n d E x t e r n a l L i b r a r y S e r v i c e s in R e l a t i o n to the U s e r s of the S e r v i c e s a . A c q u i s i t i o n b. O r g a n i z a t i o n of m a t e r i a l c. C i r c u l a t i o n d. R e f e r e n c e S e r v i c e e. A u d i o - v i s u a l S e r v i c e s f . G r o u p s e r v i c e s a n d s e r v i c e s to i n d i - v i d u a l s V . T h e B a s i c P r i n c i p l e s a n d V a r i o u s P a t t e r n s of L i b r a r y O r g a n i z a t i o n a n d M a n a g e m e n t a. G e n e r a l p r i n c i p l e s of o r g a n i z a t i o n a n d m a n a g e m e n t b. P a t t e r n s of l i b r a r y o r g a n i z a t i o n a n d m a n a g e m e n t c. R e l a t i o n s h i p s of the l i b r a r y to the l a r g e r o r g a n i z a t i o n of w h i c h it u s - u a l l y is a p a r t d. P l a n n i n g , h o u s i n g , a n d e q u i p p i n g li- b r a r y s e r v i c e s e. P e r s o n n e l m a n a g e m e n t f . E v a l u a t i o n of l i b r a r y p r o c e d u r e s a n d s e r v i c e s g . F i n a n c i n g a n d b u d g e t i n g h. P u b l i c r e l a t i o n s V I . A n I n t r o d u c t i o n to the C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s a n d F u n c t i o n s of the C o m m u n i c a t i o n P r o c e s s t h r o u g h o u t H i s t o r y and in the P r e s e n t . ( T h e r e a r e no s u b - h e a d i n g s h e r e b e c a u s e , as o r i g i n a l l y a p p r o v e d , these r e l a t e d m a i n l y to mass c o m m u n i c a t i o n , until M a r - g a r e t E g a n r e s c u e d the w o r k s h o p f r o m its o w n c o n f u s i o n ( p p . 2 7 - 2 9 ) . ) JULY, 1954 32 7 ( I t is u n f o r t u n a t e t h a t the p r o c e s s of c l a r i - fication, i n i t i a t e d b y M i s s E g a n , w a s not c a r r i e d f u r t h e r , f o r the e x a c t n a t u r e of the l i b r a r y ' s r e l a t i o n to the c o m m u n i c a t i o n p r o c e s s is the k e y to i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the l i b r a r y ' s f u n c t i o n in society. T h i s s h o u l d h a v e been the s t a r t i n g point f o r the e n - t i r e d i s c u s s i o n , but the p o i n t w a s a l l o w e d to d r o p a s t h o u g h it w e r e a m i n o r q u i b b l e o v e r w o r d s . ) V I I . A n I n t r o d u c t i o n to the F u n c t i o n s a n d M e t h o d s of R e s e a r c h , a n d the U s e of R e s e a r c h F i n d i n g s ( T h i s w a s e l a b o r a t e d to m e a n t h a t " i n d i - v i d u a l l i b r a r y e d u c a t i o n p r o g r a m s may i n c l u d e . . . r e s e a r c h s t u d i e s , " d e s p i t e the p r o t e s t of S t a n l e y W e s t t h a t should s h o u l d be substituted f o r may ( p . 3 0 ) . ) The Committee on Implementation urged that increased attention be given to improving the selection of students qualifying for ad- mission to the library schools; that criteria for the selection of library school teachers should be established; that the core program should be carefully integrated with existing courses, and that survey courses should be kept at a minimum; and that the work of the library schools should be integrated with the colleges or universities of which they are a part, (pp.31-33) The author of this report is careful to point out that the seven headings listed above "are not course titles but descriptions of con- tent areas which shall represent one-fifth of a minimum five-year program at the college level and beyond." (p-52) Also from the beginning, the Workshop had defined as being beyond its province any consideration of "spe- cifics of teaching method, course sequence and comparative time spent on the several aspects of the recommended content." (p.52) Finally, this report concludes with an appendix which lists over twenty character- istics "expected of the librarian as a profes- sional person." (pp.67-68) One would like to quote them all, but space limitations neces- sitate selection: Integrity Wholesome respect for other people Persistent effort to understand people Natural talent and aptitude for working with people A joy in mental life and activity Librarianship is part of character Work is not a daily chore etc., etc. One really must see this list to believe it! Throughout the text, too, there are state- ments which, perhaps because they have been lifted from the context of the original discus- sion, are difficult to interpret. Thus one reads, on page 14, "that most thesis research is of no value for librarians" and again, "that most librarians are not actually called upon to evaluate research." One wonders how any professional person can, today, read his own professional literature without being com- pelled to evaluate in some fashion the results of those investigations into the nature and characteritics of the field he is supposed to serve. Even more puzzling is the statement on page 41, attributed to Howard Winger, " 'Employers want people who have had prac- tice in cataloging; they don't care about the philosophy of it. The University of Chicago has had a course in the philosophy of catalog- ing, but this was regarded by the field as ri- diculous.' " The Graduate Library School, to the knowledge of this reviewer, has never offered a course in "the philosophy of cata- loging." T o be sure, it has offered a research seminar in the theory of classification, but this was restricted entirely to advanced stu- dents at the level of the doctorate, and was never thought as a segment of the "core." This is, incidently, the only mention anywhere in the report of any part of the doctoral pro- gram, even discussion of advanced training at the intermediate level having been held to a minimum. But since the remark was al- lowed to stand the reviewer, who formerly taught the seminar in theory of classification, might point out that the purpose of the doc- toral program, and therefore its appropriate content and method, differs sharply from that of the core curriculum. One is not simply more of the other, and certainly not more "practice in cataloging." The two programs are—or should be—functionally related and the failure to perceive the nature of this re- lationship accounts for much of the profes- sion's educational frustration, including that over the problem of research, as noted above. Surely, too, M r . Winger can distinguish be- tween cataloging and classification, which again are related but different processes. That the dean of students, who made this inaccurate and irrelevant remark, and the dean of the Graduate Library School, who let 350 COI.LEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES it slip into the final report, could be so con- f u s e d about both subject and level seems incomprehensible, but there it stands. V i e w e d in retrospect, one cannot escape the conclusion that the areas identified in this report as being essential to the " c o r e " are, in the main, the traditional subjects, enriched, perhaps, by a ubiquitous obedience to " p r i n - ciples" or " t h e o r y " as opposed to practice or technique. I t seems not to have occurred to the participants of the W o r k s h o p that such principles must be derived either f r o m current l i b r a r y practice, or f r o m research, and that if a basic core of theoretical knowledge common to all librarianship is to be identified these are the only sources f o r its derivation. T h u s one is still l e f t with little more than tech- nological or managerial instruction—raised to a slightly less mechanical level, to be sure, but still not truly professional. Obviously the professionalism of librarianship, if it exists (and this r e v i e w e r is quite convinced that it does) must be sought in other w a y s . F u r t h e r m o r e , it is to be doubted whether any director of any l i b r a r y school in this country can look at these outlines of the core and not exclaim, " T h i s is exactly w h a t w e have been teaching all the t i m e ! " I n f a c t the author of this report admits this when, in his concluding chapter, he says, " N o n e of these recommendations represents a particu- l a r l y new or startling proposal. . . . M o s t of them have been voiced at one time or another by students of the field." ( p . 5 3 ) H e does f e e l , however, that " T h e importance of the W o r k s h o p recommendations is that they represent a consensus of both practicing li- brarians and educators, and that they are no longer seen as interesting statements of theory but as accepted guides to practice. T h e y represent, in a sense the signal to the schools that curriculum changes which, in the past, have seemed to be too idealistic f o r accept- ance by the field, w i l l be welcomed by the f i e l d . " ( p . 4 1 ) T h i s f a i l u r e of the W o r k s h o p to produce the results expected of it, may be attributed to a variety of f a c t o r s : 1 . B a s i c a l l y the plan of procedure that underlay the W o r k s h o p w a s unrealistic. One does not solve the complex and vexing prob- lems of education, either f o r librarianship or any other f o r m of human activity, by col- lective endeavor limited to five days of deli- beration. T h e g r e a t advances in educational theory have not come through group discus- sion however " d e m o c r a t i c " this may appear to be. On the contrary, progress has been the product of individual effort, over long peri- ods of time, a product derived f r o m the in- tense mental concentration of a rich and f e r t i l e brain, and executed in the quiet con- fines of the private study. P r o g r e s s in edu- cation has not come through legislative enact- ment and the vote of the m a j o r i t y , yet " E a c h report w a s discussed by the group as a whole and w a s accepted, by vote, to represent the thinking of the W o r k s h o p participants." ( p . 3 4 ) T h a t A m e r i c a n education is no w o r s e than it is is largely due to a life-time of individual labor by a H e n r y B a r n a r d , a H o r a c e M a n n , a J o h n D e w e y , a R o b e r t M a y n a r d Hutchins. 2. A t many points the W o r k s h o p seemed to lack focus and adequate leadership. T h a t may have been due, in part, to a conscious e f f o r t by the sponsors to avoid predisposing the participants to any predetermined philo- sophy, point of view, or method of procedure. B u t w h a t e v e r the explanation, one is often reminded of the classical r e m a r k by which L o u i s R o u n d W i l s o n once abruptly terminated a fruitless argument in his course in " L i - b r a r y T r e n d s , " " I think this discussion is getting nowhere and if you f e l l o w s think it is, I think you're m i s t a k e n ! " One wishes many times that " L . R . W . " had been there. 3. B y accepting, without much question, the general belief that the possession of a common body of theoretical knowledge is the most important single attribute of a p r o f e s - sion, the W o r k s h o p , either consciously or un- consciously, based its deliberations on the simple logical proposition: A profession has a common body of theore- tical knowledge Librarianship is a profession T h e r e f o r e , L i b r a r i a n s h i p must have a com- mon body of theoretical knowledge. O r , as the author of this report expresses it, "accept a core or reject professional s t a t u s . " (p.4) T h e alternative to " l o v e me, love my dog," w a s one which the W o r k s h o p , quite obviously, w a s unwilling to accept, and thus the outcome of its deliberations w a s f o r e - ordained f r o m the start. Adherence to the " c o r e idea," then w a s not derived f r o m any inherent characteristics of library practice, JULY, 1954 32 7 but f r o m an intense desire on the p a r t of the personnel of the W o r k s h o p to " b e p r o f e s - s i o n a l . " 4. T h e time-span of only five days w a s much too limited to permit the adequate f o r m u l a t i o n of concepts and principles of the magnitude h e r e considered. 5. T h e concept of the sponsors r e g a r d i n g the relation of p r o f e s s i o n a l practice to educa- tional theory w a s in e r r o r . T h e function of education is not to follow but to lead. A d - mittedly the educator w o u l d be w e l l advised to submit his " f i n d i n g s " to the p r o f e s s i o n , at f r e q u e n t i n t e r v a l s , f o r criticism and e v a l u a - tion, but the basic responsibility f o r educa- tional advance is his alone. T h a t the G r a d u - ate L i b r a r y School, under the leadership of W i l s o n , W a p l e s , J o e c k e l , B u t l e r , R a n d a l l , C a r n o v s k y , and their immediate successors, achieved such m a r k e d success is l a r g e l y to be attributed to the f a c t that it k n e w v e r y w e l l w h a t it w a s about. I t w a s quite s e l f - s u f f i - c i e n t ; it f e l t no need to ask the p r o f e s s i o n which w a y p r o g r e s s l a y ; and it relentlessly and uncompromisingly blazed its o w n t r a i l through the tangled w i l d e r n e s s of uncertainty and doubt, a t r a i l that the p r o f e s s i o n soon w o r e into a w e l l - b e a t e n path. B u t to this r e v i e w e r the most disturbing result of the W o r k s h o p w a s its insistance that at least a portion of the " c o r e " be t a u g h t at the u n d e r g r a d u a t e level, and that " s t u d e n t s w h o have had this u n d e r g r a d u a t e training in l i b r a r y subjects be permitted to demonstrate their m a s t e r y of 'duplicated' course content t h r o u g h e x a m i n a t i o n r a t h e r than through h a v i n g to r e t a k e courses w i t h s i m i l a r titles and content." ( p . 3 5 ) I n vain L e R o y M e r r i t t and W i l l i a m W i l l i a m s o n a r g u e d that such a recommendation w o u l d dilute the basic gen- e r a l education of g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s ; that, though it w o u l d be recognized as inadequate l i b r a r y training, it w o u l d be t e r m i n a l in many i n s t a n c e s ; that g r a d u a t e s of such a p r o g r a m w o u l d o f t e n find themselves in t r u l y p r o f e s - sional positions, ( p . 3 6 ) T o these a r g u m e n t s they might h a v e added, t h a t it w o u l d tend to o b l i t e r a t e the much too indistinct lines of d e m a r c a t i o n between p r o f e s s i o n a l and sub- p r o f e s s i o n a l and between s u b p r o f e s s i o n a l and c l e r i c a l w o r k e r s ; that it w o u l d complicate still f u r t h e r the c o n f u s e d p a t t e r n of degree s t r u c t u r e ; that it w o u l d raise a v a r i e t y of difficult problems respecting state and muni- cipal c e r t i f i c a t i o n ; that it w o u l d support a trend that the l i b r a r y schools h a v e been s t r u g - gling to oppose; that it is tacit admission that the " c o r e " c u r r i c u l u m is not r e a l l y " p r o f e s - s i o n a l " a f t e r a l l ; and that it w o u l d threaten to set l i b r a r y education back almost to the days b e f o r e the W i l l i a m s o n report. " T h e m a j o r i t y f e l t , h o w e v e r , that some u n d e r g r a d u - ate w o r k is acceptable . . . based on a realistic a p p r a i s a l of supply and demand . . . and it is t h e r e f o r e better to o f f e r the best training possible under the circumstances, recogniz- ing that it is not i d e a l . " ( p p . 3 6 - 3 7 ) H a r d on the heels of this report comes the announcement by the C o l l e g e of the U n i - versity of C h i c a g o that it w i l l h e n c e f o r t h o f f e r the t r a d i t i o n a l f o u r - y e a r b a c c a l a u r e a t e degree with a y e a r of u n d e r g r a d u a t e t r a i n i n g in l i b r a r i a n s h i p , to be administered by the f a c u l t y of the G r a d u a t e L i b r a r y School. T h u s o n e - f o u r t h of the u n d e r g r a d u a t e courses of study w i l l be devoted to l i b r a r y training, w h e r e a s even the W o r k s h o p recom- mended a m a x i m u m of 1 5 to 1 8 hours. H o w quickly the f o r c e s of deterioration have been set in m o t i o n ! T h u s has the G r a d u a t e L i - b r a r y School a b r o g a t e d its original m a n d a t e f r o m the C a r n e g i e C o r p o r a t i o n to prosecute " r e s e a r c h , defined as 'extending the existing body of f a c t u a l k n o w l e d g e concerning the v a l u e s and p r o c e d u r e s of l i b r a r i e s . . . in- cluding the development of methods of in- vestigation w h e r e b y significant d a t a are ob- tained, tested, and applied' . . . and to l e a v e to other l i b r a r y schools . . . the responsibility f o r passing on to their students a body of principles and practices that h a v e been f o u n d u s e f u l in the conduct of l i b r a r i e s . " 1 A n U n - d e r g r a d u a t e L i b r a r y School, this is the once- p r o u d " G . L . S . " at mid-century—sic transit gloria!—Jesse H. Shera, School of Library Science, Western Reserve University. International Book Production Grundriss des Buchhandels in aller Welt. B y S i g f r e d T a u b e r t . H a m b u r g , E . H a u s - w e d e l l , 1 9 5 3 . 3 5 i p . D M 20. T h e l i t e r a t u r e on international book p r o - duction and the flow of printed m a t e r i a l s 1 Waples, Douglas, "The Graduate Library School of Chicago," Library Quarterly, 1:26-27, January, 1931. 352 COI.LEGE AND RESEARCH L I B R A R I E S