College and Research Libraries 50th Anniversary Feature- The Unintended Revolution in Academic Libraries: 1939 to 1989 and Beyond Barbara B. Moran n 1989, the Association of Col- lege and Research Libraries (ACRL) celebrates its fiftieth anniversary. The years since its founding have been a period of great change and progress in academic librari- anship. Academic libraries have evolved from relatively small, self-sufficient insti- tutions to large, multifaceted organiza- tions electronically interconnected and linked in ways not yet envisioned fifty years ago. The librarians who work in these institutions, although sharing many of the same attitudes and values of their predecessors, are called upon to have knowledge of processes and to provide services unforeseen in 1939. Academic li- brarianship in the United States has changed more rapidly and radically dur- ing the past fifty years than it had during its prior 300-year history. This paper will examine some of these changes and attempt to chart the course of academic librarianship from 1939 to the present. To do justice to this history, far more space would be needed than is pro- vided here. What follows is a much com- pressed and highly selective look at the topic, but it is hoped that the account will be comprehensive enough to permit the identification of the most important trends and influences and to isolate some useful generalizations. Tracing the development of academic li- brarianship results in two seemingly con- tradictory impressions. On one hand there are fundamental changes: Libraries have begun to make the transition from manual to electronic systems, and many central components, including collec- tions, organization, personnel, and ser- vices, have been modified. The libraries of today are very different institutions from those of fifty years ago. On the other hand there are great similarities, so that an old adage seems to be applicable: the more things change the more they st~y the same. Many contemporary issues and concerns were articulated and shared by academic librarians working in the field fifty years ago. More discouragingly, many of the problems that seemed intrac- table in the late 1930s have indeed proven to be unyielding and are yet to be re- solved. The first issues of C&RL contained articles on topics such as the appropriate- ness of the Ph.D. and the advisability of faculty status for academic librarians, the necessity for research by academic librari- ans, the problem of low salaries for librari- ans in relation to faculty, the percentage of the institutional budget that should be de- voted to libraries, and the advantages and disadvantages of library centralization. Barbara B. Moran is Associate Professor, School of Infonnation and Library Science, University of North Caro- lina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27599. 25 26 College & Research Libraries These topics are still on the agenda. The following account focuses largely on the changes in librarianship but also ex- amines some of the similarities that indi- cate, perhaps better than anything else, both the strengths of academic libraries and the weaknesses where improvement and progress still need to be made. In clos- ing, this paper turns briefly from the past to the future: What lies ahead for the aca- demic librarian in the next half century, and what should librarians be doing now to prepare for that future? THE ACADEMIC LIBRARY IN 1939 Many present-day librarians can only dimly imagine an academic library of the late 1930s. In what type of library were the founders of ACRL likely to have worked? According to one librarian who worked in such a library, The year 1938 was back in the era of typewriters and adding machines (both non-electric), of du- plicate hand-written or typed book cards (one filed under call number and one under borrow- er's name), of typing short-form original cata- loging if LC cards were not available, when bill in duplicate for book orders was sufficient. Bib- liographical resources of this period were also limited. Of the great national library catalogs in book form only that of the Bibliotheque Na- tionale, completed to the letter "R", offered much assistance in searching. The new edition of the British Museum General Catalogue of Printed Books had progressed only into the "B's," and there was no general record of Li- brary of Congress's vast holdings except the de- pository catalo.ps or proof sheets found only in large libraries. Although there were exceptions, the typical academic library in the years before World War II had a small collection and a small staff. The usual educational prepa- ration for librarians was a fifth-year bache- lor's degree (B. L. S.) from a library science program, and librarians carried out many tasks that were essentially clerical in na- ture. The pay was low. There was rarely faculty status for any academic librarian below the administrative level. Some ref- erence service was probably provided, but little effort was put into teaching students about the use of the collections, especially on a formal basis. Book selection was com- monly done by interested faculty, not li- brarians. The acquisition budget. was January 1989 small, and most major collections were shaped by gifts and by development tech- niques that emphasized curricular needs and serious, scholarly material. The col- lection was composed almost entirely of books and journals; only a few libraries held any type of audiovisual materials or microfilm. Librarians had little input into decisions made by administrators, and the head librarian might be a recruit from the teaching faculty. Only a few cooperative ventures were in existence, and most li- brarians, operating in relative isolation, had no formal relationships with other li- braries or with librarians outside of their own institutions. Academic libraries of the late 1930s were not only very different from contemporary libraries but also from the libraries that had preceded them. If it is accepted that the fundamental purpose of the academic li- brary is to support the educational mission of its parent institution, then, as institu- tions of higher education change, so will the libraries associated with them. There had been significant changes in U.S. higher education since the founding of Harvard University in 1636. The most important of these had resulted from the impact of the German research university and the land grant acts in the latter part of the nine- teenth century. For the most part, the mod- ifications to higher education had been in- cremental, and both academic institutions and libraries had had sufficient time to alter and adapt in response to them. In 1939, however, the academic library, along with its parent institution, was standing at the brink of the greatest period of change ever encountered and the changes would occur so swiftly and unrelentingly that all of higher education would have to struggle to keep abreast of them. '' 'The changes that crumbled the ivory tower of 1940 were not only un- foreseen and unplanned but were largely unintended and unwanted.' '' THE REVOLUTION IN HIGHER EDUCATION Thomas Bonner, in a recent article in Change magazine, describes the "unin- tended" revolution in American higher education since 1940-a revolution result- ing in a contemporary system of higher education that he argues is as different from that of 1940 as our present-day col- leges and universities are from those in the developing nations of Asia and Af- rica. 2 And, as Bonner points out, "The changes that crumbled the ivory tower of 1940 were not only unforeseen and un- planned but were largely unintended and unwanted. ''3 In his view, higher educa- tion did not control the developments that resulted in these changes but instead was carried along by swift social and demo- graphic currents. Bonner lists the de- mands of World War II, impact of the re- turning veterans, economic growth, international crises, the baby boom, politi- cal strife, Vietnam, campus revolts, eco- nomic decline, and changing public sup- port as the most important developments that have changed higher education dur- ing the past five decades. To this list must be added the growth of electronic technol- ogy, which has produced broad-based changes within institutions of higher edu- cation, especially in the last ten years. If only one word could be chosen to de- scribe the changes in both higher educa- tion and libraries, it would have to be growth. In academic libraries the growth- in size of collections and staff, in number of services provided and patrons served- mirrors the growth that took place in American higher education during the same time period. Only about half of today' s colleges and universities existed in 1940, and they served a student population of fewer than 1.5 million. These students were predomi- nantly male and ~hite, drawn almost ex- clusively from upper- and middle-class families. The federal government played an insignificant role in funding; the sup- port of higher education just prior to World War II came almost entirely from a combination of student tuition and state government expenditures. The total na- tional expenditure for higher education amounted to only 700 million dollars in 1940 compared to the 95 billion dollars spent in 1985. 4 Spurred by the GI bill, the expansion in American higher education began after The Unintended Revolution 27 World War II, but grew most rapidly in the sixties and seventies. During this period new universities were established, state colleges became universities, normal schools and teachers' colleges expanded into state colleges or universities, and hundreds of community and technical col- leges were opened. By 1950 there were 2,300,000 students enrolled in American colleges and universities; by 1960, 3,600,000; b/'1970, 8,650,000; and by 1980, 12,100,000. Despite the much-discussed ''baby bust,'' enrollments have not dropped as feared; standing today at ap- proximately 12,400,000; the enrollment figure is kept up primarily by the ex- panded number of nontraditional stu- de'nts.6 1 The new students who flocked to higher 1 education were the impetus for new courses, programs, schools, and degrees. The liberal arts, the major of choice for al- most all students fifty years ago, is now se- lected by only a third of them. In the 1980s ·nearly 60 percent of all college students are pursuing degrees in a wide range of profes- sional and occupational studies. Students of today are a much more heterogeneous group than those enrolled in 1939. There are now more female than male students in institutions of higher learning. Blacks and most other minorities, although still under- represented in relationship to their num- bers in the population as a whole, have made tremendous strides since 1939, when many institutions of higher education were still closed to them. Despite cuts in federal aid for students during the last decade, there has been a broadening of opportuni- ties to earn a degree-no longer is a college education the prerogative of children from upper- and middle-class families only. Al- though higher education in the U.S. still does not provide universal access, it serves a higher percentage of the college-age pop- ulation than does any other country. Higher education is no longer the exclu- sive preserve of the eighteen- to twenty- two-year-old. Perhaps the most striking indication of this change is the fact that, among more than twelve million college students, only about two million are full- time, living on campus, and aged eighteen to twenty-two. 7 Older students, many at- tending college on a part-time basis, now 28 College & Research Libraries constitute an important segment of the en- rollment on most campuses. The growth and expansion of U.S. higher education over the past half cen- tury has made a dramatic impact upon ac- ademic libraries. Although today's li- braries are larger according to almost any variable that might be measured, growth alone is not an adequate explanation of the changes that have occurred since 1939. Two other factors have been driving forces behind the changes, especially those of the past twenty years: the greater accep- tance by librarians of interinstitutional co- operation and the adoption of new tech- nologies. Over the past fifty years, academic li- braries have come to realize that interinsti- tutional cooperation is essential to meet- ing the needs of their users. The move to a more cooperative stance has been necessi- tated by economic circumstances and has been facilitated by the development of on- line data that can more easily be shared among institutions. Today's libraries are relying on networking and resource shar- ing as an integral part of their activities. During the past twenty years, the changes brought about by technology have been so extensive that it is difficult to assess their total impact. Librarians adopted technology with great enthusi- asm and, despite the fact that they have sometimes been viewed as a conservative group, were pioneers in the use of com- puter technology. The library was usually the first academic unit on campus to com- puterize. The match between automation and libraries was a natural one because li- brarians usually spend much more time processing data about their collections than they do working with the collection itself. Growth in the size of the collection and demand for services were added in- centives for librarians to explore the ways in which automation could assist in per- forming routine library operations. To- day, even the smallest academic libraries have been affected by the technological changes that have swept through librari- anship. The causes of the transformation in aca- demic librarianship are many and varied. The following section focuses primarily on the three factors discussed above- January 1989 growth, cooperation, and technology- and examines their impact on the critical components of collections, budgets, orga- nization, buildings, staff, and services. LIBRARY COLLECTIONS In 1939 the median size of the book col- lections in U.S. universities was 329,706; in small colleges, 62,285; and in teachers' colleges, 25,341. 8 Today the average col- lection in all types of libraries has in- creased dramatically. For just one exam- ple, the median for ARL university libraries is now more than two million vol- umes.9 During the post-World War II era, many distinguished collections were amassed. Collection building and growth were among the major concerns of aca- demic librarians; libraries were ranked by collection size, and bigger was always bet- ter. Growing both in numbers an~ diver- sity, academic library collections now rou- tinely consist not only of books and jour- nals but of micr:oforms, audiovisual materials in many formats, and increasing numbers of machine-readable databases, online texts, and software programs. The broad spectrum of courses being offered in today' s institutions of higher education has led to the collecting of library materials in areas that would have been unheard of previously. No account of the past fifty years would be complete without a mention of the in- formation "explosion" and its impact upon academic libraries. Beginning after World War II, the amount of published material skyrocketed as fields of study grew and subdivided, resulting in the pro- duction of more and more new and spe- cialized journals. The numbers of mono- graphs being published both here and abroad also ballooned, increasing 14 per- cent a year during the sixties and 2.8 per- cent a year during the seventies. 10 As acquisitions librarians know all too well, the cost of publications escalated along with the amount of material being published. The largest cost increases be- gan to occur in the 1970s, at a time when libraries' materials budgets were begin- ning to stagnate; the increases resulted in a severe erosion of purchasing power. Li- brarians reluctantly acknowledged that their previous levels of collection building could no longer be maintained and that the days of the comprehensive, self- contained collection were over. Perhaps one of the greatest changes of the past fifty years is the realization that, because of the rising level of scholarly output, no library, however large, can be self-sufficient but instead must be part of a system in which users are linked to needed resources in other collections. The resource sharing that is such a clear hallmark of the academic library in the 1980s was spurred by the hard realities of increased publication and decreased budgets but is not a new development. Al- though there were some examples prior to 1939, the most notable cooperative efforts have been attempted throughout the past fifty years. Many geographically close li- ·braries began cooperative acquisition plans during the 1930s. The New England Deposit Library opened in 1942, the Uni- versal Serial and Book Exchange and the Farmington Plan began in 1948, and the Midwest Interlibrary Center (later to be- come the Center for Research Libraries) was established in 1949. 11 Interlibrary loan existed before 1939; but with new tools that permit both efficient verification and ordering of items, ILL has become an inte- gral part of library cooperation in the past few decades. Libraries have gradually moved away from collection building and growth to a new emphasis on providing access to in- formation from many sources. Academic librarians of the future must remember, however, that access depends on owner- ship by at least one party. On the whole, today' s libraries can provide access to ma- terial because they own the material col- lectively. Since self-sufficiency is no longer possible, greater attention will need to be paid to coordinated, coopera- tive collection development such as that being attempted by the Research Libraries Group's Conspectus. 12 During the past fifty years, academic li- brarians have also begun to face up to the physical deterioration of large parts of the collections . Prior to this time, preser- vation was a neglected activity, and to- day's collections reflect that neglect. 13 The problem of brittle books has been The Unintended Revolution 29 compounded by the preservation prob- lems associated with some of the newer media such as film, videotape, and mag- netic tape, which are just as fragile and apt to deteriorate as pulp paper. Despite advances in preservation techniques, ac- ademic librarians are far from having a cure for this malady, and the preserva- tion problem is one that must wait for so- lution in the years ahead. Although some new preservation tech- niques and storage devices such as optical disks hold promise, funding, as usual, provides the major obstacle. At a time when libraries need to find funding sources in order to invest in technology, they are faced with the concurrent need to invest in preservation to save their collec- tions. Because of the size of the problem and the overwhelming cost required to solve it, cooperative action will be needed. A coalition of librarians, scholars, aca- demic administrators, publishers, and all who use the records of civilization is needed to forge an alliance and seek a common solution to this problem if tomor- row's scholars are to have access to the collections built with great care and cost in the past. LIBRARY BUDGETS The actual increases in academic li- braries' budgets are less dramatic if they are adjusted to reflect the inflation of the dollar that has occurred. In 1938 insti- tutions of higher education spent $17,588,000 on libraries; 14 in 1985, the last year for which figures are available, they spent $2,361,000,000. 15 The 1960s were a period of especially great affluence for ac- ademic libraries, but this prosperity was followed by the stringent budgets of the seventies and eighties. And, even with an increased library budget, there was no way to keep up with the growth in publi- cations. One of the reasons that technology was embraced so eagerly was the hope that the use of automation would reduce the day- to-day costs of operation. Many library di- rectors justified the heavy capital expendi- tures necessary for computer-based systems by promising lower operating costs in the future. These trade-offs- capital investments for lower operating 30 College & Research Libraries costs-almost never succeeded. As Rich- ard De Gennaro wrote, When we first started to use computers in li- braries 15 years ago, we thought we would save money, but we soon learned there would be no net savings from automation. Then we thought that automation would at least "reduce the rate of rise of library costs," but even this is proving to be illusory as we demand and receive an ever increasing variety of new and expensive ser- vices from our network and local systems. 16 By automating, the library multiplied its capabilities and raised the expectation level of library staff and user alike. Thus, as library services became more efficient and useful, demand for them increased. While the unit cost of any given service might decline, the total cost of satisfying the increased demand would go up. One of the constants in academic librari- anship over the past fifty years has been the portion of the parent institution's budget that has been devoted to libraries. Before the 1960s, academic libraries re- ceived, on the average, about 3.1 percent of the total institutional budget. During the late sixties and early seventies, the fig- ure rose to about 4 percent but, after 1976, drifted down again. 17 The percentage var- ies from institution to institution, with large universities devoting a smaller per- cent of their budgets to libraries than small colleges. The true significance of the pat- tern is what it reveals about institutional budgeting for libraries. It seems clear that library funding is not based on the li- brary's need because, if it were, the per- centage would fluctuate from year to year. Academic library costs have not been de- termined by need but by available reve- nue. Libraries have not been successful in providing a rationale for the funds they need and seeing those needs met by their parent institutions. This invariant pattern does not augur well for the future when li- braries, more than ever, will require in- creased budgets to meet the demands of their expanding role in the use of technol- ogy. If the percentage of the institutional budget has been constant, one of the most inconstant elements in library funding over the past fifty years has been federal funding. Although federal aid to libraries was almost nonexistent in 1939, it began to January 1989 increase after World War II, reached a high point during the late 1960s, and then began a slow decline. One of the greatest factors supporting the growth of librarian- ship during 1945-70 was federal funding. The Higher Education Act of 1965 pro- vided three library programs: Title IIA, funds for acquisition of books, periodi- cals, and other materials; Title liB, library training and research demonstration pro- grams; and Title IIC, a centralized catalog- ing and acquisition program under the di- rection of the Library of Congress. The Library Services and Construction Act and the Academic Facilities Act were also important pieces of legislation for aca- demic libraries. 18 Budgeting for technology has been one of the major difficulties since the 1960s. Traditionally, 60 percent of the library budget had been used for salaries, 30 per- cent for materials, and 10 percent for other expenses. The percentage used for ''other'' needed to be increased during the past few decades because this is the section of the budget used to finance auto- mation. As a result, libraries had to cut back on the percentages for personnel and materials. Within the materials budget, they are now facing the problem of balanc- ing the cost of new electronic sources against the cost of traditional library acqui- sitions. It would be reassuring to think that universities will increase the budgets of libraries sometime soon, but this does not appear to be likely in the near future. Too many competing claims exist. As the new information technologies become more widespread, they will make students and faculty more productive, and there will be a need to shift funding from faculty to infrastructure. Both li- braries and computing centers would ben- efit from this move, 19 but it will likely be re- sisted by many units on campus. In addition, librarians themselves will need to find ways to limit the need to provide services through both print and electronic means. The decisions to be made in these areas will not be easy ones. ORGANIZATIONAL PATTERNS The growth in the size of libraries has led to the adoption of different organiza- tional patterns. In 1939, almost all college and university libraries, regardless of size, were organized along departmental lines with all department heads reporting di- rectly to the chief librarian. As libraries grew in size, the number of departments grew also so that the span of management became too broad to be workable, and this highly centralized organizational pattern needed to be modified. Various experi- ments at reorganization were attempted, but, by the early 1950s, the bifurcated or- ganizational pattern with its division of functions into public and technical ser- vices had been widely accefted by most large academic libraries. 2 Since then, some libraries have produced modifica- tions to this structure; for instance, in 1973 the library at Columbia University orga- nized its activities into a services group, a resources group, and a technical support group. Nonetheless, the bifurcated struc- ture is still the most common in large li- braries while most smaller libraries con- tinue to be organized departmentally. Although much has been written about the merger of technical service and public service departments in academic libraries, this type of reorganization is still more conjecture than reality. As libraries grew in size and complexity, the number of middle managers prolifer- ated. In addition to the traditional line managers, most large libraries now in- clude a team of individuals who provide specialized managerial expertise in areas such as personnel, budgeting, planning, and automation. The past fifty years has been a period when libraries have continued to grapple with the thorny issue of centralized versus decentralized services. Fifty years ago, Robert A. Miller argued the pros and cons of centralized and decentralized collec- tions in areas such as accessibility, effi- ciency, interrelationship of subject field, and cost. 21 Today' s library directors are still trying to arrive at a balance between the efficiency of centralized services and the greater convenience of decentralized services. At most institutions, the present trend has been to continue to centralize services as much as possible. In a similar vein, academic librarianship has seen the waxing and now the waning of interest in undergraduate libraries. The Unintended Revolution 31 Harvard's Lamont Library was built in 1949, but the real proliferation of this type of library came in the 1960s and the early 1970s when the number of undergradu- ates on campus was expanding most rap- idly. The interest in establishing new un- dergraduate libraries has dwindled in the past fifteen years because of cuts in library budgets, stable enrollments, and the as- sumption of many that separate libraries for undergraduates are unnecessary now that bibliographic instruction programs are available to make the main library more comprehensible to undergraduate users. The future place of both undergraduate and branch libraries is not clear. Still to be factored in is the impact of the new tech- nologies and the advent of new methods of document storage and retrieval. Many of the arguments in favor of centralization will disappear when materials can be shared electronically among libraries. Some writers predict that the library of the future will consist of small, decentralized units which will provide users with the convenient, individualized services they have always preferred. 22 The new technol- ogy will likely be a driving force in deter- mining the organizational structure of the library of the future, but the shape of that library is still to be determined. JIBetween 1967 and 1975, 647 aca- demic library projects were com- pleted in the U.S. at a cost of $1,900,000,000. Many of the projects were partially funded with federal money authorized under the Higher Education Facilities Act.'' LIBRARY BUILDINGS Indicative of the growth of higher edu- cation is the spurt in library building that went on during the middle of the period under consideration. With the infusion of federal money in the sixties and seventies, a large number of academic libraries were built. Between 1967 and 1975, 647 aca- demic library projects were completed in the U.S. at a cost of $1,900,000,000. Many 32 College & Research Libraries of the projects were partially funded with federal money authorized under the Higher Education Facilities Act. 23 Many of the old main libraries that were replaced were refurbished and used for other pur- poses such as undergraduate libraries or classroom buildings. Not only have library buildings grown in sheer numbers and in size, but the change in architectural design over the past fifty years has seen a shift from the ''monumental'' library building, still the most common type in the 1930s, to 1:1 more functional style of library architecture. Edna Ruth Hanley's College and University Library Buildings, published in 1939, pro- vides a good introduction to the style of ar- chitecture Eopular in academic libraries at that time. 24 The book presents photo- graphs and floor plans of 42 college and university libraries that had been erected between 1922 and 1938, the most expen- sive of these libraries costing $1,200,000. The columns, cupolas, and towers associ- ated with "old fashioned" library build- ings are all well represented. The architecture of the buildings built since 1939 has been very different from that of the earlier era. The older, fixed form buildings were replaced by buildings with functional flexibility which provided facilities for group discussion rooms, con- ference rooms, individual study carrels, and comfortable reading areas. The new buildings had good lighting and ventila- tion, air conditioning, open stack design, comfortable furniture, and adequate acoustical properties. 25 During the past few years, the "flexibil- ity'' of some of these new buildings has been strained as librarians have attempted to accommodate the computer hardware, especially the terminals, being added in li- braries. The need for space is critical as li- braries are going through a transition pe- riod between online and manual systems. Libraries with online catalogs still need space for traditional card catalogs and ref- erence departments are attempting to find room for CD-ROM terminals among the reference stacks. The clatter of the printer in public use areas is a new sound in most libraries, and librarians are struggling to find a way to accommodate harmoniously January 1989 the old and new technologies of librarian- ship. "When C&RL published its first an- nual statistics in 1941-42, the median number of full-time personnel in the largest academic libraries was thirty- seven.'' STAFF The size of the library staff has increased commensurately with the growth of the rest of the library. When C&RL published its first annual statistics in 1941-42, the median number of full-time personnel in the lar9est academic libraries was thirty- seven. 6 Today, each of those same li- braries would have a full-time staff that numbers in the hundreds. 27 But to de- scribe the changes in the personnel as- pects of academic libraries as growth alone would obscure the truly significant ad- vances made in this area. In the past five decades, the tasks pro- fessional librarians perform have become more clearly differentiated from those per- formed by nonprofessionals, and, in many instances, tasks that had been done by professionals have been transferred to members of the support staff. As Allen Veaner has written, this displacement provides an illustration of technological imperative in that once technology is used to accomplish complex, routine mental work, that work is driven downward in the work hierarchy away from profes- sional to support staff. The professional's work then expands to include new and more challenging tasks, and, as a result, li- brarians have acquired a more clearly de- fined professional responsibility. 28 In terms of professional-level staff, the academic libraries of today are ''leaner and meaner" organizations. As recently as 1950, the staff of most college and uni- versity libraries was composed of fifty to ninety percent professional librarians. In most contemporary libraries, the ratio is now one professional librarian to two sup- port staff members, and in some large li- braries, the proportion of professional li- brarians is still lower. Professional librarians of today, taken as a group, are better educated than those of fifty years ago. Almost all of them have at least a master's degree, and a large num- ber have, in addition, a second master's degree or a Ph.D. They are graduates of professional schools whose curricula are less practice-oriented and more research- and problem-oriented than they were fifty years ago. Librarians not only enter the profession with a better education, but they strive to continue that advantage not only by rec- ognizing the value of continuing educa- tion and staff development but also seek- ing out opportunities to avail themselves of further education. Without this willing- ness to continue to learn, librarians would have found their knowledge and skills had become outdated in the rapidly changing academic library field. The past fifty years also have seen librar- ians assume tasks that were not consid- ered totally within their sphere of compe- tence in the late 1930s. Individuals trained as librarians, not bookloving faculty mem- bers, are found as directors, almost with- out exception. Librarians, not teaching faculty, now do the bulk of the book selec- tion (although often with the advice of in- terested faculty), and collection develop- ment is considered to be the right of the library staff. Librarians now routinely en- gage in teaching, both within the library and without, by means of bibliographic in- struction programs. These changes have led to a greater pro- fessional maturity among academic librar- ians. Most of today' s academic librarians have a clear view of their place and pur- pose within academe and recognize that they play a role of central importance in the instructional and scholarly life of the university. This greater professional ma- turity has been reflected in the growth of the number of professional journals, in the increase in research and publications, in interest in professional organizations, and in the establishment of policies and standards. Academic librarians have also made tre- mendous strides in their quest for partici- The Unintended Revolution 33 pation in library governance. In 1939 al- most all libraries were organized in a traditional hierarchical structure, and the most common management style was au- thoritarian with the director making all de- cisions relating to the library. Although there are still a few authoritarian directors remaining, non-administrative librarians are now involved to some degree in deci- sion making in almost every academic li- brary. The committee system has been found to be an effective method of provid- ing librarians' input. Although a few small libraries have adopted the faculty model of collegial governance, the sheer size of most academic libraries makes that model an inappropriate one. A few libraries have also experimented with matrix or project management organization patterns in an attempt to provide greater staff input and involvement, but on the whole, the aca- demic library of today is still organized in a traditional, pyramidal fashion. The differ- ence is that librarians have been successful in finding ways of providing opportunity for staff participation in decision making within the confines of the bureaucratic structure. The now generally accepted premise that academic librarians should have in- put into decision making provides an in- teresting contrast to the still unresolved is- sue of what is the appropriate status for academic librarians. This is an issue that was being discussed fifty years ago (and before) and is still far from being resolved today. Miriam Maloy wrote in a 1939 ALA Bulletin article: [W]riters have pointed out the important func- tion of the librarian as a teacher and his obliga- tion to pursue higher studies and broaden his outlook by travel, just as regular faculty mem- bers are expected to do. These are good argu- ments for the inclusion of librarians in the aca- demic ranks rather than the administrative ranks. . . . However, some groups of librarians have felt that more immediate advantage could be gained in their particular institutions by stressing and developing their unique status as librarians, raising their own standards, devel- oping their own potentialities, and bringing to the attention of college authorities the educa- tional and cultural requirements of the library profession. 29 34 College & Research Libraries Maloy's words describe the situation in 1989 as well as they did fifty years previ- ously. The quest for faculty status for aca- demic librarians began well over 100 years ago, 30 but it began to become a central con- cern for librarians starting in the fifties and sixties. The concern about the most appro- priate status for librarians has extended up to the present and is reflected in the fact that perhaps more has been written about this particular aspect of academic li- brarianship than about any other during the last 25 years. The move toward faculty status was ad- vanced by the decision of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) to admit librarians as members in 1956. At the 1969 ALA Conference, ACRL approved a motion establishing as one of its chief goals, full faculty status for all aca- demic librarians. ACRL, the Association of American Colleges, and AAUP drafted a joint statement on faculty status of col- lege and university librarians urging the granting of faculty status to librarians as well as the same rights, privileges, andre- sponsibilities of faculty members. 31 Al- though recent surveys have shown that nearly 80 percent of librarians report hav- ing faculty status, 32 it is clear that few li- brarians have full faculty status "with the same rights, privileges, and responsibili- ties." In the past decade, a large number of ac- ademic librarians have begun to recon- sider the issue, and some now feel that perhaps the quest for faculty status was misguided. It is their judgment that aca- demic librarians have assumed the dual responsibilities of teaching faculty mem- bers and librarians to their own detriment. Despite the fact that faculty status still has its strong proponents, a growing number of individuals now advocate having librar- ians organize as a separate academic group to seek recognition and status as li- brarians. Under this status, it would be necessary for librarians to set strict stan- dards for performance, education, and professional competence if they wished to earn the respect of their faculty col- leagues, but at least librarians would be judged by criteria appropriate not to an- other profession b\lt to their own. January 1989 The debate about the appropriate status which has consumed so much energy and effort during the past fifty years has yet to be resolved. Perhaps, the ultimate resolu- tion will be the realization that there is no one "ideal" status for academic librarians and that the appropriate status can best be worked out on an institution-specific ba- sis. In those institutions which have granted full faculty status to librarians in- cluding the released time and the institu- tional support needed for doing research, faculty status may indeed be a realistic op- tion. In those other, more numerous insti- tutions where faculty status has been granted in name only, librarians might do well to seek to be judged on criteria di- rectly related to what they do in their own profession. Here again, the impact of technology will be a significant factor. If libraries of the future are the decentralized units fore- · seen by some, where a "holistic" librarian with an advanced subject degree and knowledge of the research process works in close relationship with faculty and stu- dents in a specific discipline or field of study, the faculty status model might fit very well. Some of the changes in the personnel patterns in academic libraries have been the result of the changes in personnel pat- terns within academe as a whole. The push of collective bargaining units into in- stitutions of higher education beginning in the 1970s has resulted in the union- ization of a large number of librarians, es- pecially those in large public systems. In- terest in better working conditions has led to increased attention being paid to the quality of the working life within libraries. Most libraries now have instituted formal grievance policies which can be used tore- dress employee complaints. Academic libraries have also mirrored the improving conditions for women and minorities within the society as a whole. Interestingly, women had an easier time securing positions in library administra- tion in the late 1930s than they did in the sixties and seventies. In 1930, only 9 per- cent of all librarians were male; by 1940, the percentage of males in libraries had in- creased to only 10 percent. 33 Males were encouraged to enter the field of academic librarianship after World War II. The per- centage of males increased until now it is estimated that approximately 20 percent of all librarians are males, with a higher percentage of males working in academic libraries than in any other type of library. The most recent statistics show that ap- proximately 35 percent of all academic li- brarians are male. 34 As males entered aca- demic librarian ship, females were displaced from administrative positions, especially in the large, research university libraries, where their representation in ad- ministration had always been low. In 1930, in the 74 institutions of higher edu- cation with enrollments of more than 2,000, there were fifty-five men and nine- teen women serving as chief librarians. As women retired, men were hired to take their places. By 1967, 70 of these libraries were headed by men and only 4 by women-not one .of the fifty largest aca- demic libraries was directed by a woman. In the late 1960s, even the women's col- leges that had traditionally employed fe- male head librarians were employing males. 35 In the 1970s, federal Equal Em- ployment Opportunity legislation was made applicable to institutions of higher education, and conditions for women im- proved. Today, 28 of the 103 ARL univer- sity libraries have female directors, and there is a higher percentage of females at the middle management level than ever before. Academic libraries, like other insti- tutions in our society, still need to make progress in the area of equal opportunity for women, but they have left behind, for- ever it is hoped, a time when an advertise- ment like the following could appear: "Stymied in your present job? Want to broaden your experience? Like to work in brand-new building under ideal condi- tions? Insist on liberal fringe benefits? Want faculty status? If so, and you are male, you may be interested. " 36 In terms of equal opportunity for racial minorities, academic libraries have also made progress. In 1939, an article in the ALA Bulletin reported the problems associ- ated with library education for blacks. 37 At that time Hampton Institute, the only li- brary school for blacks, was on the verge The Unintended Revolution 35 of closing. The article urged the establish- ment of another library school to prepare black librarians. The problem today lies not in availability of education but in how to get more minority students to enroll. Despite the efforts of many academic li- braries to increase the number of minori- ties on their staffs, the profession has not been successful in attracting minorities to the field. Librarianship has to compete with other more lucrative professions, and is, too often, coming in second. The latest statistics show that almost 90 per- cent of all academic librarians are white; 4.5 percent, Asian/Pacific Islander; 4.1 percent, black; 1.5 percent, Hisji>anic; and .02 percent, native American. It seems obvious that libraries will not be able to compete on the basis of pay but must look for other ways to attract minority entrants. Some academic libraries and some library schools have instituted innovative schol- arship and internship programs to attract minorities to the field. More efforts in this area need to be made if librarianship is committed to increasing the number of minorities in the profession in the future. SERVICES Not surprisingly, library services have changed along with the rest of librarian- ship. Technology has had an enormous impact on technical services. Automation was first used to make the work of librari- ans easier, especially the "record- keeping'' work of librarianship including acquisitions and cataloging. Librarians de- veloped their own local systems or bought turnkey systems to help with acquisitions and serial control. The growth of the bib- liographic utilities, especially OCLC, dur- ing the seventies and eighties revolution- ized cataloging and led to a restructuring of the catalog department in almost every academic library. Because technology was first used in technical services and thus was invisible to the library user, many users were un- aware of its heavy use in libraries during the sixties and seventies, even though much of the growth in collections and ser- vices during that period was made possi- ble by its implementation. Today, espe- cially in large libraries, things are very 36 College & Research Libraries different. Patrons themselves have be- come eager users of technology such as CD-ROM discs and online public access catalogs. Public services in libraries have in- creased both in number and in compre- hensiveness over the past fifty years. Cir- culation was the first service provided in academic libraries, and, by the late 1800s, some academic libraries were providing reference service. As Samuel Rothstein has shown, however, this service was pro- vided on a minimal basis until the 1940s.39 Throughout the last fifty years, academic librarians have increased the amount of specialized and in-depth assistance in the use of collections, not only in answering users' questions, but in preparing bibliog- raphies and in providing telephone infor- mation services. Many libraries have em- ployed subject specialists to provide reference service in specific areas. In addition, two new services have been developed: bibliographic instruction, which has become an integral part of aca- demic librarianship over the past twenty years, and online searching of biblio- graphic or natural-language databases. The librarians of 1989, like those of 1939, have a strong commitment to service to users. This commitment to service may be needed even more in the near future as li- brary users have greater opportunities to interact directly with library technology and need to be trained in its use. As C. Lee Jones has pointed out, "This era of techni- cal innovation in libraries has become for patrons an age of discontinuity of library services as library practices they have grown accustomed to are rapidly replaced by new ones. " 40 It will be the librarians of the present and the future who will need to refamiliarize patrons with the library. As long as technology stayed in the backroom, librarians were not faced with this problem. Even when online searching became common, in most cases trained li- brarians performed the searching. It was not until the availability of online catalogs and CD-ROM discs that librarians found they had to spend an increasing amount of their time in the teaching of the new tech- nologies. Reference librarians in depart- ments which have just recently acquired January 1989 CD-ROM discs frequently mention the way their time is being redistributed away from traditional reference service to the in- struction of patrons in the use of the CD- ROM. These demands for new instruction and new services will only increase as li- brarians make more computerized infor- mation technology available to patrons. It is likely that in the near future librarians will be called on to help in new ways, for instance, assisting patrons with downloading information and construct- ing their own tailored databases. The po_s- sibilities in this area are limitless and will be constrained only by the amount of time librarians have available to be divided among competing demands. QUOVADIS? If growth, acceptance of cooperation, and the adoption of technology were the driving forces behind the changes in aca- demic libraries over the past fifty years, what will be their impact in the future? It seems likely that the relative importance of these factors will not remain the same. Growth, which was perhaps the strong- est force for change over the past fifty years, will likely be the weakest in the fu- ture. This is because the great expansion in higher education that served as an im- petus for the growth of libraries has pla- teaued and is likely entering a period of decline. Although it is impossible to pre- dict exactly the number of students who will be going to college in the future, the best available estimates are that between now and 1996, enrollments max decline from 12.4 to 11 million students. This de- cline will not affect all institutions equally; some types of institutions and some parts of the country will be more hard hit than others. Nonetheless, on the whole, most institutions of higher education are ex- pecting a smaller number of students to enroll between now and 1996, and that de- crease will affect libraries in many ways from budget freezes and cuts to the need for fewer seats in the reference room. The increase in publication rate that led to the spurt in the size of library collections has leveled off, but straitened budgets and increasing costs, especially for foreign se- rials, mean that librarians will still not be able to acquire a larger proportion of this output. With a shrinking enrollment and no increases seen in federal spending, there may be fewer new libraries built in the future. Librarians will need to con- tinue to experiment with remote storage facilities and steady-state collections. The cooperative efforts of libraries will likely increase and strengthen in the fu- ture. The move away from acquisitions to access will continue and be made even more necessary as costs for technology compete with funds for collection devel- opment. Many library users who would prefer to see their libraries continue to purchase the bulk of the scholarly material they need will likely resist this new em- phasis on access. Nevertheless, it is inevi- table that the collection development poli- cies of even the largest academic libraries will respond to the economic realities. Li- brarians will accelerate ''the trend away from each library being a self-contained unit, toward a system in which the library will be a service center, capable of linking users to national bibliographic files and distant collections,'' which was advocated by the National Enquiry into Scholarly Communication in 1979. 42 Advances in technology will make both the inter- institutional and the intrainstitutional sharing of resources less burdensome. Technology will play the greatest role in transforming the library of the future. It is clear that the process of technological in- novation in libraries (and in higher educa- tion) is an ongoing one. The library of to- day is in a process of transformation that has already produced great changes but which promises to produce a great many more in the future. It is important to re- member that as much as technology has already changed libraries, the changes it has made are likely to be just the begin- ning. This is because technology is usually adopted in three stages and libraries are not even halfway through the process yet. This three-stage model of technological adoption was first described by O'Connell in 1969. In the first stage, technology is used to do the same things but to do those things more quickly. In the second stage, technology is used for new applications and to do new things. In stage three, tech- The Unintended Revolution 37 nology is used in ways that create funda- mental changes within organizations and societies. 43 It is clear that at this point, most of the use of technology in libraries is still at stage one. Librarians have used com- puters to speed up cataloging, circulation, and acquisitions. Libraries began to enter stage two with technological advances such as online catalogs which have greater search capacities than traditional card cat- alogs and with database searching which permits searchers to search materials elec- tronically in ways that were never possible using print sources. 44 Stage three, the one that will lead to fun- damental changes within a society and its institutions, has not yet made its appear- ance, but when it does, the academic li- brary, like the rest of higher education, will undergo dramatic changes. At this time, the changes this stage will bring can only be dimly and imperfectly glimpsed. It is this new use of technology that will most strongly affect the shape of the li- brary of the future. THE LIBRARY OF THE FUTURE Much has already been prophesied about the library of the future, but these seers share no common vision. Some see the library of the future as relatively simi- lar to today' s but with new technological "bells and whistles" to make it work more efficiently and effectively. On the other hand, there are those who have predicted the virtual demise of the library as users' information needs are satisfied entirely by electronic information available in homes or offices. Foretelling the future is both difficult and risky. A perusal of library literature of the thirties and forties dealing with the fu- ture of academic libraries reveals that li- brarians of that time were not particularly prescient. 45 Although many authors fore- saw the growth of libraries, none of them had an inkling of the impact of computer technology upon today' s libraries. This is not surprising. Although the first com- puter was built just before World War II, general purpose computers were not com- mon before 1960. But there is no reason to 38 College & Research Libraries think that today' s librarians are going to be any more accurate in their visions. Prophets are usually led astray by linear projection-they take today' s trends and interpolate them into the future. The problem lies in the fact that the future is of- ten not linear or deterministic. As John N aisbitt has written, ''The gee-whiz futur- ists are always wrong because they believe technological innovation travels in a straight line. It doesn't. It weaves and bobs and lurches and sputters.' ' 46 What weaves, bobs, lurches, and sput- ters lie ahead for academic libraries in the next fifty years? It seems that the answer to this question depends on the larger question of what lies ahead for higher ed- ucation in that same time period. Remem- ber Bonner's description of the changes of the past fifty years as "not only unfore- seen and unplanned, but . . . largely un- intended and unwanted. " 47 Will the changes of the next fifty years be planned and foreseen any better? It seems un- likely. Higher education has learned the lesson about demographic planning. The stu- dents who will be entering the college classroom in the first decade of the twenty-first century have already been born. Both birth and enrollment rates are being closely watched by institutions of higher education. But demographic plan- ning, despite its uncertainties, is the easi- est part of planning for the future. The biggest unanswered question re- lated to the future of higher education is what impact the electronic information technologies will have on this nation's col- leges and_ universities. It is impossible to know now what the ultimate result will be. Computer technology has the poten- tial to produce as much change in our soci- ety as the invention of the printing press. As a society, we are still in the early stages of the adoption of technology and may not even realize it has begun to change our life-styles and reshape our institutions un- til it is too late either to control the effects or shape the future. It is possible that higher learning might be completely deinstitutionalized as infor- mation technology and computer net- works are improved and become common January 1989 on all campuses. Higher education may no longer be identified with institutions as defined by bricks, faculty, and libraries, but with a content of kn~wledge that could be learned wherever and whenever it best suited the student. Our institutions of higher education, as presently consti- tuted, would be anachronistic in such a learning environment. As one writer put it, Some wealthy institutions may seek to perpetu- ate their present form. But the unique structure of the American research university, in which professors do research aided by assistants who support themselves in part by teaching under- graduates what they should have learned in secondary schools may come undone. 48 Perhaps this is one possible future for higher education. In that case, there would be no need to worry about the fu- ture of academic libraries-they would disappear along with their parent institu- tions. There are, however, many counter- arguments that could be put forth against such a future. It could be asserted that the personal interaction between teacher and student will never be replaced by a ma- chine. Naisbitt has written about the need for "high touch" in a high-tech world. 49 The humanistic elements of education would still be important to most individ- uals. One might also contend that institu- tions of higher education play an impor- tant role in socializing students which could not be duplicated in an environment where a learner studies in isolation con- nected to others only by means of telecom- munication channels. But, regardless of how alien the above vision seems, higher education is likely to be transformed at some point in the future as the result of technology. It is impossible now to do more than conjecture about what shape this transformation will take and when it will occur. It seems highly un- likely that this transformation will take place within the next fifty years, since it has been shown that forecasters tend to overestimate what is likely to occur in the short run and underestimate or fail to an- ticipate at all what will happen in the long run. 50 So dramatic change will not come quickly to higher education but it will come eventually. To avoid the fate of the carriage makers of the nineteenth century who had no idea they would be replaced by the automakers of the twentieth, all in- dividuals involved in higher education, including librarians, need to think about the future direction of the field. While this will not stop the flow of change, at least the changes may not be as "unplanned and unintended" as they might be. Of course, the task is complicated by the fact that the participants have a stake in the ex- isting structure but that is all the more rea- son for them to want to exert as much in- fluence as possible in shaping the future of higher education. If the long-term future of both higher education and academic libraries is un- clear, the short-term future is much easier to describe. The academic library of the early part of the twenty-first century will still be a strong and vibrant institution. As today, there will be a great diversity in these libraries. Some of the smallest ones may still have made only modest invest- ments in technology although the prolifer- ation of microcomputers will have made technology more affordable for all. Many libraries, especially those in large and wealthy institutions, will have trans- formed themselves into ''electronic'' li- braries. They will be active participants in an environment where the library serves as the connecting agency or gateway be- tween users and information in all for- mats. Their services will be available in a much more decentralized fashion, and us- ers will not have to come to a physical en- tity, the library, to use its resources. There will be a much closer relationship (or pos- sibly, a merger) between the library and the computer center, as each discovers that the scholarly information needs of in- dividual institutions can be met only by cooperative effort. Librarians in this setting will have to learn to handle long-distance users- library patrons whom they have never seen. There will be opportunities for li- brarians with their specialized knowledge of both information skills and technolo- gies to play more active roles in instruc- tion. The development of electronic li- braries will impose still greater demands The Unintended Revolution 39 on academic libraries because the less visi- ble the medium the greater the need for the intermediary. 51 But despite the heavier use of technol- ogy in all types of academic libraries, book collections will continue to be heavily used. Books and computer output will co- exist. Libraries will continue to add new technologies but these new technologies will not completely replace the existing ones. What should librarians be doing now to make the transition to this short-term fu- ture easier? First of all, they should be tak- ing an active part in their institution's planning for electronic technologies. Aca- demic librarians need to be at the forefront in discussions about electronic technolo- gies on campuses. They should be work- ing collaboratively with other units on campus such as the computer center and the telecommunications center to explore new ways to exploit the powers of the new technology. They should be discussing how to secure the funding, both for capital costs and ongoing expenditures, that will be necessary to finance the new technolo- gies and services that libraries may pro- vide and how to balance these new costs against the costs for traditional library ma- terials and services that will still be needed. They should be investigating the type of education (and reeducation) nec- essary for staff to function effectively. Li- brarians also should be working on diffi- cult issues such as how to handle copyright and ownership of materials in machine readable files and how to provide maintenance for electronic databases that are in a constant state of change. Finally, and most important, academic librarians should be attempting now to define the roles they want libraries and librarians to play, because if they do not, others will define those roles for them. Librarians should seize the initiative to take advan- tage of opportunities the new technolo- gies are presenting them to make the re- structured library a major force in the university's new information environ- ment. Despite the uncertainties of the future, the opportunities for libraries are bright. Libraries have existed as institutions for 40 College & Research Libraries nearly 3,000 years because they have had a vital role to play in society. That role will continue. Fifty years from now academic libraries will still be in existence. They will have changed, no doubt as much or more than the libraries of today have changed from those of 1939. Yet, in 2039, when ACRL celebrates its 100th anniversary, there will be an opportunity for someone else to write an article for C&RL about the changes in academic libraries in the last fifty years. It is likely that author too . will discuss the unforeseen changes that oc;:- curred in libraries since 1989 and how un- January 1989 prepared in some respects libraries were for the changes that befell them. Perhaps, he or she will marvel that the librarians of the twenty-first century are still wrestling with some of the same problems as their predecessors. Will the most appropriate status for academic libraries still be a mat- ter of concern? But there is every reason to believe that the underlying theme of that article as of this one will be that libraries have come through another period of challenge and change and are stronger en- tities than ever before in institutions of higher education. REFERENCES 1. Jean M. Ray, "The Future Role of the Academic Librarian as Viewed through the Perspective of Forty Years,'' New Horizons for Academic Libraries, ed . R. D. Stueart and R. D. Johnson (New York: Saur, 1979), p.405 . 2. Thomas N. Bonner, "The Unintended Revolution in American Colleges since 1940," Change 18:44-51 (Sept./Oct. 1986). 3. Ibid., p.44. 4. Ibid., p.45. 5. V. R. Cardozier, American Higher Education (Aldershot, England: Avebury, 1987), p.ll. 6. U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Statistical Abstracts of the United States, 1988 (Washington, D.C.: Govt. Print. Off., 1987), p.140. 7. Harold L. Hodgkinson, "The Changing Face of Tomorrow's Student," Change 17:38 (May/June 1985). 8. Willis H. Kerr, "Summary of 123 Reports from College and University Libraries," ALA Bulletin 33:98 (Feb. 1939). 9. ARL Statistics, 1986-87, comp. Nicola Daval and Margaret McConnell (Washington, D. C.: Assn. of Research Libraries, 1988), p.25. 10. John F. Harvey and Peter Spyers-Duran, ''The Effect of Inflation on Academic Libraries,'' in Aus- terity Management in Academic Libraries, ed. J. F. Harvey and P. Spyers-Duran (Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow, 1984). 11. George Bobinski, "The Golden Age of American Librarianship," Wilson Library Bulletin 58:342-43 (Jan. 1984). 12. Peter Briscoe and others, "Ashurbanipal' s Enduring Archetype: Thoughts on the Library's Role in the Future," College & Research Libraries, 47:123-24 (Mar. 1986). 13. Pamela W. Darling and Sherelyn Ogden, "From Problems Perceived to Programs in Practice: The Preservation of Library Resources in the U.S .A., 1956-1980," Library Resources & Technical Services 25:9-29 (Jan./Mar. 1981). 14. U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Statistical Abstracts of the United States, 1950 (Washington, D.C.: Govt. Print. Off., 1949), p.124. 15. U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Statistical Abstracts of the United States, 1988 (Washington, D.C.: Govt. Print. Off., 1987), p.146. 16. Richard De Gennaro, "Libraries and Networks in Transition: Problems and Prospects for the 1980's," Library ]ournal106:1048 (May 15, 1981). 17. Richard J. Talbot, "College and University Libraries" in Julia Ehresmann, ed., The Bowker Annual of Library and Book Trade Information, 29th ed. (New York: Bowker, 1984), p.76. 18. Bobinski, p.340-41. 19. David W. Lewis, "Inventing the Electronic University," College & Research Libraries 49:301 (July 1988). . 20 . Arthur M. McAnally, "Organization of College and University Libraries," Library Trends 1:22-23 (July 1952). The Unintended Revolution 41 21. Robert A. Miller, "Centralization versus Decentralization," ALA Bulletin 33:75-79, 134-35 (Feb. 1939). 22. See, for example, Hugh C. Atkinson, "The Impact of New Technology on Library Organization," in Julia Ehresmann, ed., The Bowker Annual of Library and Book Trade Information, 29th ed. (New York: Bowker, 1984); and Charles R. Martell, Jr., The Client Centered Academic Library: An Organiza- tional Model (Westport, Conn.: Greenwood, 1983). 23. Jerrold Orne and Jean 0. Gosling, "Academic Library Buildings in 1976," Library Journal101:2435 (Dec . 1, 1976). 24. Edna Ruth Hanley, College and University Library Buildings (Chicago: American Library Assn., 1939). 25. Ralph E. Ellsworth, Planning Manual for Academic Library Buildings (Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow, 1973), p.17-18. 26. "College and University Library Statistics," College & Research Libraries 4:158 (Mar. 1943). 27. Edward G. Holley, "Organization and Administration of Urban University Libraries," College & Research Libraries 33:176 (May 1972). 28. Allen B. Veaner, "Librarians: The Next Generation," Library Journal109:623-24 (Apr. 1984). 29. Miriam C. Maloy, "Faculty Status of College Librarians," ALA Bulletin 33:302 (Apr. 1939). 30. H . A. Sawtelle, "College Librarianship," Library Journal3:162 (June 1878). 31. Association of College and Research Libraries, Faculty Status for Academic Librarians: A History and Policy Statements (Chicago: American Library Assn., 1975). The ACRL approved the joint state- ment in 1972 and the AAUP in 1973. The document initially had the backing of the Association of American Colleges, but the AAC declined to endorse the joint statement after having participated in its drafting. 32. John N. DePew, "The ACRL Standards for Faculty Status: Panacea or Placebo," College & Research Libraries 44:407-13 (Nov. 1983). 33. Anita R. Schiller, Characteristics of Professional Personnel in College and University Libraries (Urbana: Univ. of Illinois, Library Research Center, 1968), p.12. 34. American Library Association, Office for Library Personnel Resources, Academic and Public Librari- ans: Data by Race, Ethnicity, and Sex (Chicago: American Library Assn., 1986), p.3. 35. Schiller, p.45-46. 36. "Classified Advertising," Library Journal84:2098 (June 15, 1959). 37. Anita M. Hostetter," A Library School for Negroes," ALA Bulletin 33:246 (Apr. 1939). 38. American Library Association, Office for Library Personnel Resources, Academic and Public Librari- ans, p.3. 39. Samuel Rothstein, The Development of Reference Services through Academic Traditions, Public Library Practice and Special Librarianship, ACRL Monograph no. 14, (Chicago: Assn. of College and Refer- ence Librarians, June 1955). 40. C. Lee Jones, "Library Patrons in an Age of Discontinuity: Artifacts of Technology," Journal of Academic Librarianship 10:152 (July 1984). ·41. Michael O'Keefe, "What Ever Happened to the Crash of '80, '81, '82, '83, '84, '85?" Change 17:40-41 (May/June 1985). 42. National Enquiry into Scholarly Communication, Scholarly Communication : The Report of the Na- tional Enquiry (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Univ . Pr., 1979), p.159. 43. J. D. O'Connell and others, "Electronically Expanding the Citizen's World," IEEE Spectrum 6:30-39 (July 1969). 44. C. Lee Jones, "Academic Libraries and Computing: A Time for Change," EDUCOM Bulletin 20:9-12 (Spring 1985). 45. See, for example, Emily Miller Danton, ed., The Library of Tomorrow: A Symposium (Chicago: Amer- ican Library Assn., 1939); Carter Davidson, "The Future of the College Library," College & Re- search Libraries 4:115-19 (Mar. 1943); Fremont Rider, "The Future of the Research Library, College & Research Libraries 5:301-8 (Sept. 1944). 46. John Naisbitt, Megatrends: Ten New Directions Transforming Our Lives (New York: Warner Bks., 1982), p.41 . 47. Bonner, p.44. 48. Francis Dummer Fisher, "Higher Education Circa 2005: More Higher Learning but Less College," Change 19:45 (Jan./Feb. 1987). 49 . Naisbitt, p.39. 50. Manfred Kochen, "Technology and Communication in the Future," Journal of the American Society for Information Science 32:148 (Mar. 1981). 51. Allen B. Veaner, "1985 to 1995: The Next Decade in Academic Librarianship, Part 1," College & Research Libraries 46:228 (May 1985).