College and Research Libraries B y T H E L M A E A T O N Classification in College and University Libraries Dr. Eaton is associate professor, Univer- sity of Illinois Library School. IN THE INTRODUCTION t o t h e s t a n d a r d e d i -tion of the Decimal Classification1 ( D C ) is the statement that 9 6 % of the public li- braries, 8 7 % of the college and university- libraries, and 6 4 % of the special libraries use the Decimal Classification of M e l v i l D e w e y . T h e s e figures have a strangely familiar r i n g — they are identical w i t h the figures given in the report of the survey of libraries, made 1920- 1922.2 T h u s they are venerable figures, more than 30 years old. It is quite possible that the figures f o r public libraries have changed little since that d a t e ; if a public library attempts reclassifica- tion it tends to change to D C , not away f r o m it. O n the other hand it is possible that the figures f r o m special libraries are completely unrealistic at this d a t e ; it is doubtful if the numerous special libraries which have been established in the past twenty-five years have adopted D C . T h i s paper is concerned only with the classi- fication schemes used in college and university libraries. I t gives the results obtained in a survey of the college and university libraries. A questionnaire w a s distributed to the 904 accredited institutions in the United States, A l a s k a , C a n a l Zone, and H a w a i i which are listed in American Universities and Colleges, 6th edition, 1952. Replies w e r e received from 744 institutions, or more than 8 2 % . T h i s is by no means the first attempt to learn, by means of a questionnaire, how li- braries classify their books. A classic example of a survey by questionnaire provided the ma- terial for a paper delivered at the W o r l d ' s 1 Melvil D e w e y , Decimal Classification. (15th ed.; Lake Placid Club, N . Y . : Forest P r e s s Inc., 1 9 5 1 ) , p. x i . 2 American L i b r a r y Association, Survey of Libraries in the United States. ( C h i c a g o : A L A , 1926-27), v. 4, p. 7. L i b r a r y Congress which w a s held during the Columbian Exposition of 1893.3 T o secure information f o r his paper on "Classification," or as he explained the term, "the arrangement of books on the shelves," H o r a c e Kephart, librarian of the St. L o u i s M e r c a n t i l e L i b r a r y , sent out a "circular of inquiry" to the heads of all libraries in the United States that w e r e believed to contain 25,000 volumes or more. In all he distributed 183 questionnaires and received 130 replies, or 7 1 % . T h e s e 1893 figures have proved a valuable source of ma- terial f o r historical studies of classification practice in the United States. T h e present study is an attempt at assembling comparable data f o r our period. Since the questionnaire used f o r the present study asked f o r some of the same information that w a s requested by K e p h a r t his circular is given b e l o w : C I R C U L A R 1. H o w m a n y v o l u m e s a r e t h e r e in y o u r l i - b r a r y ? 2. D o y o u u s e C u t t e r , D e w e y , E d m a n d s , F l e t c h e r , H a r v a r d , L a r n e d , P e r k i n s , S c h w a r t z , o r S m i t h C l a s s i f i c a t i o n ? 3. I f so, d o y o u m o d i f y it, a n d h o w ? W h a t c h a n g e s in it w o u l d y o u s u g g e s t i f i t w e r e to b e m a d e o v e r ? 4. I f y o u u s e n e i t h e r o f t h e a b o v e , p l e a s e g i v e a n o u t l i n e o f t h e m a i n d i v i s i o n s o f y o u r s h e l f c l a s s i f i c a t i o n , w i t h c l a s s m a r k s , a n d e x a m p l e s o f y o u r u s a g e i n n u m b e r - i n g b o o k s . I f a s y n o p s i s h a s b e e n p r i n t e d , a c o p y o f it w i l l s u f f i c e . 5. H o w l o n g h a s t h i s p r e s e n t s y s t e m b e e n u s e d i n y o u r l i b r a r y ? 6. I f y o u w e r e t o c l a s s i f y y o u r b o o k s a n e w , w h a t m e t h o d w o u l d y o u a d o p t ? 7. D o y o u f a v o r " c l o s e " c l a s s i f i c a t i o n ( c l o s e r f o r e x a m p l e t h a n t h e first t h r e e figures o f D e w e y , o r t h e first t w o l e t t e r s o f t h e C u t t e r s y s t e m ) ? 3 Horace Kephart, " C l a s s i f i c a t i o n . " Papers Prepared for the World's Library Congress, Held at The Colum- bian Exposition, ed. bv Melvil D e w e y (Washington, Government P r i n t i n g Office, 1896), p. 861-897. ( 168 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES 8. D o y o u t h i n k t h a t t h e m n e m o n i c e l e m e n t i n s u c h n o t a t i o n s a s t h e C u t t e r , D e w e y , S c h w a r t z , i s w o r t h w h a t i t c o s t s ? 9. D o y o u f i n d b y a c t u a l t e s t t h a t c l o s e c l a s - s i f i c a t i o n w a s t e s s p a c e ? 4 K e p h a r t w a s able to use only 127 of his 130 answers since three came from libraries with collections of less than 25,000 volumes and he w a s primarily concerned with the classifi- cation problems of the " l a r g e r libraries." It is interesting to note his assumption that book classification is primarily a matter of shelf arrangement is accepted down to the present day in most libraries in the United States. O n l y in recent years has there been much dis- cussion of classification as a means of present- ing the contents of the library in an organized manner in catalogs. O f the 127 libraries, 43, or one third of the " l a r g e r libraries" w e r e found in colleges and universities. T o d a y the percentage of large book collections held by the academic libraries has increased con- siderably. I t is probably safe to assert that about half of the large collections in the country are to be found in the colleges and universities. I t w a s impossible to secure exact figures f o r purposes of comparison, but an attempt has been made to secure some comparison by using the figures of the Public L i b r a r y Inquiry and the figures provided by the questionnaire. T w o percent of the libraries reporting to the Public L i b r a r y Inquiry 5 contained 150,000 volumes or more.6 O n e hundred and thirty- one of the college libraries reported collec- tions of 150,000 volumes. H o w e v e r , there are no figures for the really large libraries. T h e college or university librarian is not likely to consider a collection of 150,000 volumes as large. Probably the 40 libraries that reported 500,000 volumes or more con- stitute the large libraries, the group that K e p h a r t w o u l d consider if he w e r e sending out his questionnaire today. A l t h o u g h K e p h a r t listed nine classification schemes w e l l known in that period, he found that only D e w e y , which w a s used by a third of the libraries, and C u t t e r , which w a s g r o w - ing in f a v o r at that time, w e r e widely used. T h e schemes of Edmands, Fletcher, Larned, 4 Ibid., p. 962. 5 Robert D . Leigh, The Public Library in the United States. ( N e w Y o r k , Columbia U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1 9 5 1 ) , p. 54. 6 These figures cover 7,408 libraries. Perkins, S c h w a r t z , and Smith had all been designed f o r public or special libraries and w e r e not in great f a v o r among college li- brarians. T h r e e of the college libraries used C u t t e r , 19 used D e w e y and the remaining 21 used local schemes, many of them fixed-loca- tion schemes. F o r the most part the librar- ians w e r e w e l l satisfied with the arrangement of books as it existed in their individual libraries; only seven expressed any desire to change. O f the seven, t w o favored D e w e y , one C u t t e r , one wished to change f r o m D e w e y to C u t t e r , one favored Fletcher, one Perkins, and the seventh w a s ready to leave D e w e y and develop an independent scheme designed to fit his own needs. It is clear that, although there w a s much interest in classification at that time, no one solution to the problem of arrangement of books on shelves w a s accepted. Indeed the five largest libraries of that period used f o u r different classification schemes. H a r v a r d U n i - versity, with 407,100 volumes used a scheme described as fixed location, close classification. T h e University of Chicago, with 280,000 volumes used D e w e y . Y a l e described the scheme used f o r its 215,000 volumes as mova- ble, close. Columbia College with 160,000 volumes used D e w e y , and C o r n e l l with 123,000 volumes had developed a scheme of broad classification based on the press num- bers used in the British M u s e u m . T h e early years of the 20th century saw a g r a d u a l disappearance of the local schemes and the less w e l l established schemes. Some local schemes w e r e in use at the time of the survey of 1920-22 and a f e w still survive in libraries that are much too large to face the expense of reclassification. H o w e v e r , it must be remembered that of the 1 2 % of the librar- ies that did not use D C in 1922, only a rela- tively small number w e r e using the L i b r a r y of Congress classification. T h e first w a v e of reclassification, f r o m D e w e y and other schemes to the L i b r a r y of Congress ( L C ) classification,'came about the middle of the 1920's, closely f o l l o w i n g the survey. T H E S U R V E Y T h e present study w a s designed primarily to collect accurate figures as to the number of libraries using the classification schemes com- monly taught in library schools. H o w e v e r it seemed advisable to include other questions APRIL, 1955 19 7 to collect i n f o r m a t i o n as to the editions of D C being used as w e l l and the attitudes of the l i b r a r i a n s t o w a r d the common schemes. A brief and simple questionnaire, w h i c h could be a n s w e r e d w i t h o u t checking records, w a s de- signed and sent to the l i b r a r i a n s of the colleges and universities. T h e a n s w e r s sometimes came f r o m l i b r a r i a n s and sometimes f r o m the heads of technical processes or of c a t a l o g i n g , but the response w a s generous. T h e question- naire used is given b e l o w : N a m e of l i b r a r y N u m b e r of v o l u m e s 1. W h a t classification scheme do you u s e ? 2. I n d i c a t e the edition, or d a t e of the sched- ule. 3a. D o you use it as p r i n t e d ( w i t h a m i n i - m u m of a l t e r a t i o n ) ? or 3b. D o you m a k e e x t e n s i v e a l t e r a t i o n s to meet local n e e d s ? 4. If you w e r e r e c l a s s i f y i n g a l i b r a r y w o u l d you a d o p t this s c h e m e ? — 5. If y o u r a n s w e r to n u m b e r 4 w a s " n o " p l e a s e i n d i c a t e the scheme you w o u l d use. 6. If you c a r e to do so, s t a t e a r e a s o n f o r y o u r a n s w e r to n u m b e r "5" 7. If you k n o w t h a t y o u r l i b r a r y h a s e v e r been reclassified, the n a m e of the o r i g i - nal scheme a n d t h e d a t e of reclassifica- tion w o u l d p r o v i d e u s e f u l i n f o r m a t i o n . T h e original plan had been to establish six c a t e g o r i e s of size into w h i c h the libraries could be g r o u p e d : less than 5 0 , 0 0 0 v o l u m e s ; 5 0 , 0 0 0 - 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 v o l u m e s ; 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 - 2 0 0 , 0 0 0 T A B L E I N u m b e r of Libraries C o n t r i b u t i n g to the Survey Volumes in L i b r a r y N u m b e r Per C e n t - 2 5 , 0 0 0 1 0 5 1 4 . 1 2 5 , 0 0 0 - 3 5 , 0 0 0 1 4 6 1 9 . 6 3 5 , 0 0 0 - 5 0 , 0 0 0 1 2 8 17-3 5 0 , 0 0 0 - 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 1 6 6 2 2 . 3 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 - 2 0 0 , 0 0 0 96 1 2 . 9 2 0 0 , 0 0 0 - 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 63 8 . 5 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 - 1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 25 3 - 3 1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 - 15 2 . 0 T o t a l s 744 1 0 0 . 0 v o l u m e s ; 2 0 0 , 0 0 0 - 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 v o l u m e s ; 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 - 1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 v o l u m e s ; m o r e than 1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 v o l - umes. T h e division of the 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 - 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 v o l u m e g r o u p at the 2 0 0 , 0 0 0 point may seem a bit odd but it w a s made because the 1 5 t h edition of D C states t h a t it is designed f o r l i b r a r i e s of 2 0 0 , 0 0 0 v o l u m e s or less. T h e l a r g e number of l i b r a r i e s w i t h less than 5 0 , 0 0 0 v o l u m e s ( 3 7 9 ) seemed to call f o r f u r t h e r division and three c a t e g o r i e s w e r e used instead of the one t h a t had been pro- posed e a r l i e r . T h e number of libraries in each size c a t e g o r y is shown in T a b l e 1. C L A S S I F I C A T I O N S C H E M E S I N U S E T h e results of the present questionnaire indicate the day of v a r i e d and independent classifications in college and university l i b r a r - ies is almost past, although at least three in- dividualists w o u l d still like to prepare local schemes suitable f o r their o w n collections. T h e g r a d u a t e of the l i b r a r y school can assume that he w i l l probably need to k n o w either the L C or the D C system since only 1 . 5 % of the libraries in colleges and universities use. any- T A B L E 2 Classification Schemes Used in College and University Libraries Size, by Volumes D C L C C u t t e r Local O t h e r T o t a l - 25 0 0 0 97 « 6 — 1 1 1 0 5 2 5 , 0 0 0 - 35 0 0 0 133 13 — — — ; 1 4 6 3 5 , 0 0 0 - 5© 0 0 0 x i 2 15 — — 1 1 2 8 5 0 , 0 0 0 - 1 0 0 0 0 0 14 S 2 0 1 — . — 1 6 6 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 - 2 0 0 0 0 0 8 1 i-5 — — — 9 6 2 0 0 , 0 0 0 - 5 0 0 0 0 0 43 17 2 — 1 63 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 - 1 , 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 13 1 — — 25 1 , 0 0 0 , o o o - 8 4 — 2 1 15 T o t a l s 6 3 0 1 0 3 4 3 4 744 170 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES T A B L E 3 Percentage of Colleges and Universities Using M a j o r Schemes Size, by Volumes D C L C O t h e r - 2 5 , 0 0 0 9 2 - 3 5 . 8 1 - 9 2 5 , 0 0 0 - 3 5 , 0 0 0 9 1 . 1 8 . 9 0 . 0 3 5 , 0 0 0 - 5 0 , 0 0 0 8 7 . 6 11.7 0 . 7 5 0 , 0 0 0 - 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 8 7 . 4 1 2 . 0 0 . 6 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 - 2 0 0 , 0 0 0 8 4 . 3 1 5 . 6 0 . 0 2 0 0 , 0 0 0 - 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 6 8 . 2 2 7 . 0 4 - 7 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 - 1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 5 2 . 0 4 4 . 0 4 . 0 1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 - 53-3 2 6 . 6 2 0 . 0 T o t a l s 8 4 . 6 13-8 thing other than the t w o best k n o w n schemes. T h r e e of the libraries replying to this ques- tionnaire still use local s c h e m e s ; t w o of them w i l l continue to do so since their collections are too l a r g e to m a k e reclassification feasible. F o u r libraries still use C u t t e r , one uses Bliss, and one uses R i c h a r d s o n , supplemented by L C in certain s u b j e c t areas. D C is still found in 8 4 . 6 % of the college and university li- b r a r i e s but it can be assumed t h a t it is o f t e n adapted to the special needs of the l i b r a r y . T a b l e s 2-3 show the distribution of schemes. T H E D E C I M A L C L A S S I F I C A T I O N Since the D C is available in a number of f o r m s it w a s assumed t h a t libraries might be using a v a r i e t y of editions. T h e purpose of the question asking f o r the edition or date of the schedule w a s to determine h o w many l i b r a r i e s w e r e using editions more than ten y e a r s old. I t w a s k n o w n t h a t many libraries had continued to use the 14th edition of 1942 because they f e l t t h a t their collections w e r e too l a r g e to be classified according to the r e - duced schedules in the 15th edition of 1 9 5 1 . I t w a s also k n o w n t h a t certain l a r g e libraries w e r e w o r k i n g w i t h earlier editions and had developed expansions to serve their o w n needs. T h e number of l i b r a r i e s using older schedules proved to be r a t h e r less than had been antici- pated. If y o u include the libraries t h a t did not a n s w e r the question w i t h the number w h o stated an edition earlier than the 14th, only 8 % of the colleges and university l i b r a r i e s are using anything other than the 15th or the 14th, or a combination of the 15th w i t h an e a r l i e r edition. T h e f i g u r e s relative to the use of the 15th edition are probably not exact. A number of replies stated simply t h a t the latest edition w a s used. T h i s had to be interpreted as the 15th edition even though one such reply c a m e f r o m a l i b r a r i a n w h o s e c a t a l o g e r does not use the 15th edition. T h e libraries that stated they w e r e using both the 15th edition and an earlier edition, w e r e c o n f u s i n g since they o f t e n failed to state w h i c h w a s the basic scheme and h o w much use w a s m a d e of the other scheme. T h e only clue t h a t m i g h t help in a n s w e r i n g this is that v e r y f e w of the li- braries t h a t stated they w e r e using the 15th edition either alone, or in combination w i t h an earlier edition, stated t h a t they had done any reclassification. T h e adoption of the 15th edition, w i t h 1,000 of its 4,000 n u m b e r s changed, necessitates reclassification. W h e n a r e p o r t stated t h a t the 15th edition w a s used only f o r comparison and f o r n e w expansions, the l i b r a r y w a s listed as using an e a r l i e r edi- tion. T a b l e s 4-5 show the use of the v a r i o u s editions. T A B L E 4 E d i t i o n s of the D C Used in Academic Libraries Volumes in L i b r a r y 15th P l u s Earlier 15th 1 9 5 1 1 4 t h 1 9 4 2 1 3 t h 1 9 3 2 12 th 1 9 2 7 n t h 1 9 2 2 5 t h Abridged E d . 1936 N o t S t a t e d T o t a l - 2 5 , 0 0 0 24 32 26 4 3 1 2 5 97 2 5 , 0 0 0 - 3 5 , 0 0 0 35 26 58 9 1 — — 4 133 3 5 , 0 0 0 - 5 0 , 0 0 0 29 33 4 2 3 — 1 — 4 1 1 2 5 0 , 0 0 0 - 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 49 21 7 0 — 2 — — 3 145 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 - 2 0 0 , 0 0 0 23 13 45 — — — — — 81 2 0 0 , 0 0 0 - 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 14 5 18 3 2 — — X 43 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 - 1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 — 4 6 — 1 — — — 1 1 1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 - 2 — 3 1 — I — 1 8 T o t a l s 1 7 6 134 268 20 9 3 1 18 630 APRIL, 1955 19 7 T A B L E 5 Use of E d i t i o n s of D C by P e r c e n t a g e s Volumes in L i b r a r y 15 th Plus Earlier 15th 1 4 t h 1 3 t h , 12 th, or n t h 5 t h Abridged N o t S t a t e d - 2 5 , 0 0 0 2 4 . 7 3 3 - o 2 6 . 6 8 - 3 2 . 1 5 - 2 2 5 , 0 0 0 - 3 5 , 0 0 0 2 6 . 3 1 9 . 6 4 3 - 6 7 - 5 0 . 0 3 - 0 3 5 , 0 0 0 - 5 0 , 0 0 0 2 5 . 9 2 9 . 4 3 7 - 5 3 - 6 0 . 0 3 - 6 5 0 , 0 0 0 - 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 3 3 - 7 1 4 . 5 4 8 . 2 i - 3 0 . 0 2 . 1 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 - 2 0 0 , 0 0 0 2 8 . 4 1 6 . 0 55-5 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 2 0 0 , 0 0 0 - 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 3 2 . 6 11.6 4 1 . 9 1 1 . 6 0 . 0 2 . 3 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 - 1 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 0 . 0 3 6 . 3 54-5 9 - i 0 . 0 0 . 0 1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 - 2 5 . 0 0 . 0 3 7 - 5 2 5 . 0 0 . 0 1 2 . 5 T o t a l s 2 7 . 9 2 1 . 4 4 2 . 5 5 - i 0 . 3 2 . 8 R E C L A S S I F I C A T I O N L i b r a r i a n s are of necessity practical. C a t a - l o g i n g and classification demand a l a r g e p a r t of the l i b r a r y budget and there are f e w adminis- t r a t o r s w h o f e e l that they can f u r t h e r increase t h a t cost f o r a period l o n g enough to r e c l a s s i f y a l i b r a r y . Some r a t h e r l a r g e l i b r a r i e s h a v e u n d e r t a k e n reclassification in spite of the cost involved. Some h a v e begun and discontinued the w o r k b e f o r e complete reclassification w a s completed. A suprisingly l a r g e number of small l i b r a r i e s have been reclassified in recent y e a r s . T h e record of reclassification (used here only w i t h the meaning of changing f r o m one scheme to a n o t h e r ) is incomplete. Some- times the person m a k i n g the r e p o r t did not k n o w w h a t had been done d u r i n g the earlier period of the l i b r a r y ; in some cases, a n s w e r s w e r e v a g u e . T h e reports do s h o w t h a t a certain amount of reclassification has been carried on since 1920. T h e first m o v e m e n t , in this century, seemed to f o l l o w close upon the A L A S u r v e y . A n o t h e r m o v e m e n t seemed to begin about 1935 and continued until the o u t b r e a k of the w a r . T o d a y a f e w l i b r a r i e s are t r y i n g to solve their problems by reclas- sifying. T h e y give as reasons anticipated g r o w t h or the request of the f a c u l t y . T a b l e 6 shows the changes in classification t h a t w e r e reported at this time. T h e changes f r o m l o c a l schemes, f r o m the less common schemes of Smith and R o w e l l , and f r o m C u t t e r , a scheme w h i c h has not been kept up-to-date, are easy to u n d e r s t a n d . I t is easy to u n d e r s t a n d also w h y the l a r g e r l i b r a r i e s feel t h a t the L C classification might be m o r e u s e f u l to them. B u t it is surprising to find that half of the changes " f r o m D C to L C classification h a v e occurred in l i b r a r i e s w i t h less than 100,000 v o l u m e s . In r e a d i n g the explanations m a d e by the l i b r a r i a n s of these 26 r e l a t i v e l y s m a l l libraries one con- cludes t h a t the change w a s a m a t t e r of expedi- ency. T h e s e l i b r a r i a n s m a k e the change to the n e w scheme by t a k i n g L C numbers, o f t e n including the a u t h o r number, f r o m the printed cards. T h u s classification becomes a purely clerical routine but incoming books are pigeon- T A B L E 6 Reclassification of U n i v e r s i t y and College Libraries D C to L C L C to D C Local to D C Local to L C Local to C u t t e r C u t t e r to D C C u t t e r t o L C Smith to D C Rowell t o L C - 25 000 3 — — — — 1 — — — 25 0 0 0 - 35 000 7 1 3 — — — 1 — — 35 0 0 0 - 5o 000 8 — 2 — — 1 — — — 5o 0 0 0 - 100 000 8 — 1 1 — 1 1 1 — 100 0 0 0 - 200 000 9 — 1 1 — 1 — — 1 200 0 0 0 - 500 000 9 — — 1 1 2 — — — 500 0 0 0 - 1 , 0 0 0 000 5 — — — — 1 3 — — 1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 - 2 — — 1 — — — 1 T o t a l s 5i 1 7 4 1 7 5 1 2 172 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES T A B L E 7 Preference for Classification Schemes in Libraries Using D C Size of L i b r a r y in Volumes T o t a l N u m b e r N u m b e r Using D C N u m b e r P r e f e r r i n g L C N u m b e r P r e f e r r i n g Bliss N u m b e r P r e f e r r i n g Local Scheme • - 2 5 , 0 0 0 , 105 97 9 • — I 2 5 , 0 0 0 - 3 5 , 0 0 0 1 4 6 133 17 — I 3 5 , 0 0 0 - 5 0 , 0 0 0 128 1 1 2 15 1 I 5 0 , 0 0 0 - 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 1 6 6 145 29 — — 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 - 2 0 0 , 0 0 0 96 81 24 — — 2 0 0 , 0 0 0 - 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 63 43 24 — — 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 - 1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 25 1 1 6* — • — 1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 - 15 8 5** — — • T o t a l s 744 630 1 2 9 1 3 * Three of these would possibly consider L C . ** In one of these libraries the head of technical processes prefers L C but the head cataloger prefers Bliss. holed as quickly as printed cards a r e received. A desire to change the classification scheme is present more o f t e n than the means to change. L a r g e libraries consider reclassifica- tion an expensive l u x u r y but many l i b r a r i a n s w o u l d p r e f e r some scheme other than the one n o w in use if it w e r e possible to make a change. T a b l e 7 reflects w h a t appears to be a g r o w i n g dissatisfaction w i t h D C . O n e can sympathize w i t h the l i b r a r i a n in a college of music w h o says t h a t D e w e y w a s never m e a n t f o r a l i b r a r y w i t h an extensive collection of music but it is less c l e a r w h y so many l i b r a r i a n s of g e n e r a l colleges find the w e l l - t r i e d D C so u n s a t i s f a c t o r y . O f the 630 l i b r a r i e s n o w using D C , 133 w o u l d like to change to some other means of book a r r a n g e - ment. S e v e r a l l i b r a r i a n s expressed the belief that L C classification w a s more s a t i s f a c t o r y f o r college libraries but did not explain in w h a t respects they considered it superior. Possibly the l i b r a r i a n s w h o made these state- ments w e r e concerned w i t h closed stack li- b r a r i e s and the choice of a classification scheme f o r such a l i b r a r y is not influenced by the r e a d e r ' s reaction to book a r r a n g e m e n t . A classification scheme is not necessarily good or bad in itself, but it is s a t i s f a c t o r y if it meets the needs of l i b r a r y patrons. T h a t no less than a f i f t h of the libraries n o w using D C f e e l t h a t L C classification w o u l d be better is s h o w n in T a b l e 8. H o w e v e r , not all librarians f e e l that L C classification is ideal f o r all situations. N o less than 1 3 % of the l i b r a r i e s w h i c h use L C w o u l d like to r e t u r n to the D C . In g i v i n g reasons f o r this recommendation a number of the librarians stressed the elaborateness of L C and its unsuitability f o r small, open-shelf collections. O t h e r s stated that they f a v o r e d the continuation in the u n d e r g r a d u a t e college of the classification scheme w i t h w h i c h stu- dents w e r e a l r e a d y f a m i l i a r as a result of using it in high school libraries. T a b l e 9 shows t h a t it is only in libraries of less than 200,000 v o l u m e s t h a t the v a l u e of the D C is stressed. I n addition to the libraries n o w using L C and D C there a r e others w h o feel the need of change. T h e l i b r a r i a n s w h o use C u t t e r are at a disadvantage because they must pro- vide the expansions that are needed to keep this scheme up to date. M o s t of the l i b r a r i a n s n o w using C u t t e r w o u l d p r e f e r L C classifica- tion but one l i b r a r i a n said he w o u l d p r e f e r D C if it w e r e available in an up-to-date e x - pansion. T h e one l i b r a r i a n using Bliss men- tioned the difficulties that beset any classifier T A B L E 8 Libraries Using D C t h a t Would Prefer L C Size of Library in Volumes N u m b e r of Libraries Using D C Percentage of T h o s e Libraries Preferring L C - 2 5 , 0 0 0 97 9 . 2 2 5 , 0 0 0 - 3 5 , ° ° ° 133 1 2 . 8 3 5 , 0 0 0 - 5 0 , 0 0 0 1 1 2 13-4 5 0 , 0 0 0 - 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 145 2 0 . 0 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 - 2 0 0 , 0 0 0 81 2 9 . 6 2 0 0 , 0 0 0 - 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 43 5 5 . 8 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 - 1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 1 1 54-5 I , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 - 8 6 2 . 5 T o t a l s 630 2 0 . 4 APRIL, 1955 19 7 w h o uses a scheme t h a t is not commonly used and stated a p r e f e r e n c e f o r L C classification to h a v e the a d v a n t a g e of the class numbers assigned by-the L i b r a r y of C o n g r e s s . H o w much reclassification w i l l take place in the y e a r s immediately ahead of us cannot be estimated. I t is u n f o r t u n a t e t h a t the people w h o are considering reclassification cannot h e a r w h a t tasks c o n f r o n t e d the li- b r a r i e s that u n d e r t o o k reclassification. Some of the l a r g e r l i b r a r i e s h a v e completed their p r o j e c t s successfully, but other l i b r a r i e s that began reclassification discontinued the w o r k w i t h o u t completing it. T h u s they are l e f t w i t h t w o or m o r e classification schemes in use in their l i b r a r i e s . W h e n classification is used p r i m a r i l y f o r a r r a n g i n g books on the shelves in closed stack areas, a v a r i e t y of classifica- tions m a k e s little difference. M a n y libraries h a v e f o u n d it necessary to develop expansions of their basic classification to take care of special collections. O f t e n these are provided w i t h a notation that is u n i f o r m w i t h that used f o r the basic scheme. T h e s e local adaptations are seldom a v a i l a b l e f o r use by other libraries and are not considered in the f o l l o w i n g discussion of the use of more than one classification scheme in a single l i b r a r y . C O M B I N A T I O N OF S C H E M E S I n a n u m b e r of the s m a l l e r l i b r a r i e s special schemes w e r e used f o r religious books. N i n e of the 379 libraries w i t h book collections of less than 50,000 v o l u m e s indicated that the L y n n classification w a s used f o r religion. In some of these libraries the m a j o r classification w a s D C ; in others it w a s L C . Seven addi- tional libraries in this size g r o u p used the W a l s h modifications of the D C 200 class. O n e of the l a t t e r l i b r a r i e s had begun w i t h L y n n f o r religious books but had f o u n d it too e l a b o r a t e f o r a small l i b r a r y and had changed to W a l s h . O n e l i b r a r y in this g r o u p speci- fied t h a t it used the L o y o l a U n i v e r s i t y f o r m of the 100 class of D e w e y . O n e l i b r a r y claimed to use the 15th edition of D C w i t h Bliss modifications but did not e l a b o r a t e that statement. In the next g r o u p of libraries, those w i t h book collections of 50,000 to 100,000 v o l u m e s , f o u r l i b r a r i e s indicated that they use a special scheme f o r religion. In one instance L y n n w a s used f o r religion in a l i b r a r y t h a t w a s classified according to L C classification. I n T A B L E 9 Libraries Using L C t h a t Would P r e f e r D C Size of L i b r a r y in Volumes N u m b e r of Libraries Using L C P e r c e n t a g e of T h o s e Libraries Preferring D C - 2 5 , 0 0 0 6 5 0 . 0 2 5 , 0 0 0 - 3 5 , 0 0 0 13 7 - 7 3 5 , 0 0 0 - 5 0 , 0 0 0 15 1 3 . 2 5 0 , 0 0 0 - 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 2 0 1 5 . 0 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 - 2 0 0 , 0 0 0 IS 6 . 6 2 0 0 , 0 0 0 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 17 0 . 0 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 - 1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 13 0 . 0 1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 - 4 0 . 0 T o t a l s 1 0 3 1 3 . 6 t w o cases L y n n w a s chosen f o r religion in libraries t h a t used D e w e y f o r the main part of the collection. In the f o u r t h case W a l s h modifications w e r e used w i t h D e w e y . A tech- nical l i b r a r y , C a s e I n s t i t u t e of T e c h n o l o g y , used D e w e y f o r the main collection and the U n i v e r s a l D e c i m a l C l a s s i f i c a t i o n f o r physics and chemistry. O n e college in the group, w h i c h f o r m e r l y used a d i f f e r e n t classification f o r some classes, is n o w p u t t i n g e v e r y t h i n g into a single classification. R o l l i n s C o l l e g e w h i c h had used L i b r a r y of C o n g r e s s classifica- tion f o r the sciences, music and fiction began r e c l a s s i f y i n g those classes according to the 15th edition of the D C in 1 9 5 1 . A number of examples of l i b r a r i e s using special schemes f o r a p a r t of the collection are found in schools w i t h collections of f r o m 100,000 to 500,000 v o l u m e s . W e l l s C o l l e g e at A u r o r a , N e w Y o r k , uses D e w e y f o r the main l i b r a r y and the M e t r o p o l i t a n M u s e u m of A r t scheme f o r the l i b r a r y of the A r t D e - p a r t m e n t . T h e U n i t e d S t a t e s M i l i t a r y A c a d - emy, at W e s t Point, w a s originally classified according to D e w e y but has adopted L C clas- sification f o r n a v a l and m i l i t a r y science and f o r the m a t e r i a l on the t w o w o r l d w a r s . T h e U n i v e r s i t y of I d a h o uses D e w e y f o r the main collection but supplements it w i t h v a r i o u s special schemes f o r special collections. I t uses the M c C u r d y classification f o r physical education, the K o r a t e a u scheme f o r f o r e s t r y , and the N e b r a s k a E x p e r i m e n t Station scheme f o r a g r i c u l t u r e . C l a r k U n i v e r s i t y has in effect three classification schemes. T h e li- b r a r y , w h i c h w a s originally classified by a local scheme, w e n t t h r o u g h a p a r t i a l p r o g r a m 174 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES of reclassification at one time. A t the present time radically shortened versions of L C classes H and J are used, and some other classes are used as printed by L i b r a r y of Congress. T h e remainder of the library uses the original local scheme. T h e reclassification project w a s discontinued some years ago. Several schools in this group mentioned that their government documents are arranged according to the classification of the Super- intendent of Documents. Virginia Polytech- nic Institute and Brooklyn College are D e w e y libraries that f o l l o w this plan; T e x a s T e c h - nological College at Lubbock, T e x a s , is an L C library using this special arrangement f o r documents. O x f o r d University, M i a m i , Ohio, specifies that it uses the Illinois adaptation of modern foreign language literature with D C . M o u n t Holyoke, one of the f e w remaining C u t t e r libraries, uses L C classification for science. W i l l i a m and M a r y uses D e w e y for its main collection, with the D a r t m o u t h adap- tation for the «8oo's, L C classification for Shakespeare, and a local scheme f o r V i r - ginian a. A number of libraries in the 500,000 to 1,000,000 volume group are currently engaged in reclassification, usually changing f r o m D C to L C classification. O t h e r s in the group have at some time begun a reclassification project but dropped it before completion. B r o w n reported that, although the main col- lection has been reclassified f r o m a modifica- tion of C u t t e r , some sections remain un- changed and a half dozen special classification schemes are used f o r special collections. D a r t m o u t h uses primarily D C , but some parts of the library remain in its original local scheme, patterned a f t e r C u t t e r . Physics and mathematics have been reclassified according to L C classification. T h e 15 libraries containing more than a million volumes each, have special problems that have been g r o w i n g with the libraries during the past years. Columbia uses D e w e y as its main classification but uses L C for its art and medical libraries. Stanford uses D C for the main library but uses L C classifica- tion f o r the H o o v e r L i b r a r y and some smaller collections. Princeton, which uses the Rich- ardson scheme, reclassified social sciences, fine arts, music, ethnology, and folklore, during the period f r o m 1920 to 1940, using the L C classification. T h e University of Michigan uses L C except for literature and medicine which have been l e f t in D C . T h e University of C a l i f o r n i a ( B e r k e l e y ) uses L C except for law, English language and literature, and a considerable amount of material in foreign languages and literature which are still in the R o w e l l classification. Illinois uses D C f o r its main collection but L C f o r its map collection. Y a l e and H a r v a r d w i t h local schemes make such special adjustments as needed. C O N C L U S I O N S In comparing the answers received on this survey with those received on the 1893 study one notes a difference in the attitude t o w a r d classification. In 1893 there w e r e many schemes, most of them local, and the librari- ans expressed themselves as w e l l satisfied. T h e libraries of today use a small number of classification schemes, but the librarians are not too w e l l satisfied with classification as it exists today. T o d a y 84.6% of the libraries use D C but a considerable number of librar- ians w h o use that scheme express dissatisfac- tion w i t h it. T h e y use it only because it has become w e l l established and the cost of re- classification is prohibitive. O n the other hand it is evident that the theory of cooperative classification has been widely accepted by librarians. D e w e y ' s dream that you might go into any library in the country and be assured of finding the book bearing the same classification number that it had in every other library may yet come to pass, but the class numbers w i l l be those from the L i b r a r y of Congress classification, not those from D e w e y ' s Decimal Classification. T h i s may be because there is a tendency today f o r librarians and catalogers to think of classification as a shelving device. T h e aim of the cataloger is to get the material on the shelves, and out of the cataloging de- partment. W h e t h e r or not the material w i l l be easily available to the patron once the cataloger has finished with it seems to matter very little. T h e library bought the book, cataloged it, placed it on the shelves. T h a t ends the library's responsibility. T h e an- swers to questions showed f a r too little con- sideration of the patron. T o o f e w of the answers showed any thought of how the clas- sified collection would serve the people for whom it w a s being prepared. A librarian w h o w r i t e s a f u l l page of com- APRIL, 1955 19 7 ment about how efficient he has become as a result of changing f r o m D C to L C classifica- tion f o r his collection of 35,000 volumes makes no mention of how the change w i l l affect the patrons of the library. H e only emphasizes the point that by accepting the L i b r a r y of Congress numbers for both class and author, he can speed up his w o r k and save time in the preparation of the books f o r the shelves. It is not to be assumed that no librarians are concerned w i t h the use of collection. Several mentioned points that indicated that they w e r e quite conscious of their responsibility to the students w h o made up the college community. Several of these people mentioned the ad- vantage of retaining D C in a small college to simplify the transition f r o m the library of the secondary school to the library of the higher institution. Some of the catalogers in li- braries of colleges of education emphasized their belief that teacher-training schools needed to use D C since it is being used in the high schools. In addition to the catalogers using the L C classification numbers, there are the catalogers using the D C numbers on the L C cards w i t h - out checking them. T h e numbers printed on the cards are usually the closest classification possible and many of the libraries using these numbers do not need close classification. If these librarians simply accept the numbers as they appear, w i t h o u t consulting numbers used previously, older books on a subject w i l l prob- ably not be shelved with new w o r k s on that subject. T h o s e w h o accept the D C number as printed on the L C cards fail to mention any w o r k of revising earlier classification. T h e classifiers of today have available t w o usable classification schemes. T h e L C scheme is designed for a large library, and since it lacks general numbers for many areas w i l l never serve very w e l l in the small library needing broad classification. I t w i l l serve the large library very w e l l . D C is, at the mo- ment, in a most unfortunate state due to severe amputation and a 2 5 % change in w h a t remains. N u m e r o u s statements found on the questionnaires indicate the deep concern felt * by librarians w h o consider D C an excellent scheme f o r small libraries, and for those of medium size, but feel that it can no longer be depended upon because its changes necessitate too much revision of existing classification. T h e 15th edition of D C is not adequate in scope for even the small library. I t is to be hoped that the 16th edition, which is antici- pated in the next f e w years, w i l l satisfy the needs of libraries already classified according to D C . B u t even with a good up-to-date scheme the classifier must know how to apply the scheme to his library and must be willing to w o r k at classification. Doctoral Programs Offered The School of Librarianship on the Berkeley campus of the University of C a l i f o r n i a w i l l offer programs leading to the degrees of D o c t o r of Philosophy and D o c t o r of L i b r a r y Science. T h e program f o r the degree of D o c t o r of L i b r a r y Science is intended primarily for those inter- ested in the technical and administrative aspects of librarianship; the program for the degree of D o c t o r of Philosophy is designed f o r those interested in teaching and research and in prob- lems of a broadly historical and theoretical nature. T h e fields contemplated for the P h . D . are bibliography, history of libraries, history of bool§s and printing, and the library as a social institution; those f o r the D . L . S . are public libraries and college and university libraries. In- formation concerning details and requirements of the two programs may be obtained by w r i t i n g the D e a n , School of Librarianship, University of C a l i f o r n i a , Berkeley 4. T h i s is the first time that opportunity for w o r k at the doctoral level in librarianship has been offered at any institution west of the Mississippi. T h e universities that have already established such programs are Chicago, Columbia, Illinois, and M i c h i g a n . 176 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES