College and Research Libraries Academic Librarians and the Library and Information Science Monograph: An Exploratory Study Peter Hernon The present climate of economic retrenchment and information sharing has direct implications for the purchase of library and information science mono- graphs by academic libraries. This paper explores the collection and use of these monographs by academic librarians. Furthermore, the paper shows the prefer- ences of academic librarians for literature that has practical applications. The exploratory research also indicates possible topics meriting further investigation. he hard sciences value publi- cation primarily in the form of scholarly journal articles. Such articles constitute a means by which scientists in academe achieve the recognition of their peers, promotion, ten- ure, and, in some instances, financial re- ward. Charles B. Osburn reminds us that publication is not a peripheral func- tion of research; it is rather an integral part of the scholarly process that would be rendered incomplete and valueless without it. By proportion, the journal is the most characteristic expression of the spirit of science and scholarship, and its history embraces the contribu- tion of science and scholarly research.1 As university libraries and schools of library and information science (LIS) adopt the scientific model, the article, presumably in refereed journals, be- comes the primary publication vehicle for disseminating the results of research in LIS and for bestowing academic rec- ognition on the authors. 2 Various writers have asserted the im- portance of scholarly journal articles in LIS.3 Diane Mittermeyer, Lloyd J. Houser, and Wilma Sweaney, however, assert that the literature of library administration does not follow the scientific model.4 Rather, that literature exhibits a preference for mono- graphs over journals.5 These findings, ac- cording to the researchers, indicate that the literature used is not scholarly, draws on a knowledge base older than the normal so- cial sciences, and reflects "an affinity with a humanities style of literature production rather than a scientific one."6 Furthermore, they suggest that library administration depends on areas other than LIS for its theoretical rna terial. Sharon J. Rogers and Charlene S. Hurt maintain that the scholarly journal will become obsolete as the primary vehicle for scholarly communication. They fore- see its replacement by electronic net- works.7 The apparent preeminence of scholarly journals and perhaps, by exten- sion, electronic networks calls into ques- tion the role and importance of other forms for conveying the written results of research and scholarship-for example, dissertations and monographs in LIS. Calvin J. Boyer discusses the doctoral dissertation, but not as part of the scien- Peter Hernon is Professor at the Graduate School of Library and Infonnation Science, Simmons College, Boston, Massachusetts 02115. 507 508 College & Research Libraries tific information flow in LIS.8 Beverly P. Lynch notes that librarians seldom refer to dissertations and formal research re- ports.9 No study reported in the litera- ture has explored the collection and use of LIS monographs by academic librari- ans. Such research ultimately will place the monograph in proper perspective: the uses of the literature and preferences of academic librarians in scholarly com- munication. The resulting insights might be useful to publishers of LIS mono- graphs and to authors writing (or plan- ning to write) such works, as well as to those responsible for collection develop- ment. The research also might remind academic librarians about the presence of the monographic literature and dis- close topics appropriate for national dis- cussion and debate. The declining sales potential for many monographs affects authors and serves as a reminder that nar- rowly conceived books will have limited impact. Librarians express dismay over the rising cost of serials, particularly foreign and scientific journals, and monographs. "Much is made of the specter of journals consuming the entire rna terials budget of a library." 10 To avoid this possibility, Robin B. Devin and Martha Kellogg, as well as others, have offered guidelines for coping with the serials explosion and balancing resource allocations to serial and monograph collections.11 However, none of these studies has sufficiently ex- amined collections of LIS monographs housed in academic libraries. Important questions include: • How much of the materials budget do academic libraries allocate to the pur- chase of LIS monographs? • At institutions that do not have LIS programs, how many LIS mono- graphs do the libraries purchase from their general fund? • Do the libraries have standing orders with LIS publishers such as the Amer- ican Library Association (ALA)? November 1991 • Who reads LIS monographs and why? The answers to such questions provide insights into the extent to which aca- demic librarians purchase and use the literature of their own profession and discipline. Apparently, the sales market for many LIS monographs has declined in recent years, although the number of mono- graphs produced annually is sizableY In past years, a title might have sold 1,500 or more copies; today, many publishers find that a majority of their titles sell fewer than 800 copies.l3·14 In fact, some publishers are reducing the number of LIS monographs they produce. Contrary to the expectations of some authors and publishing houses, recent events in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union have not created opportunities for pub- lishers to sell books in these countries. Instead, the governments must use their scarce resources to combat inflation, re- structure their economies, and provide people with basic necessities. Conceiv- ably, the governments may have to sell some art treasures to raise the necessary finances to avoid further recession. 15 Neither the People's Republic of China, India, nor Latin and South America have purchased numerous copies of LIS monographs.16 In fact, some jobbers in certain Third World countries appar- ently have been unreliable in paying cer- tain publishing houses for the titles they have distributed within the countries. 17 The declining sales potential for many monographs affects authors and serves as a reminder that narrowly conceived books will have limited impact. Expressed another way, the LIS monograph will probably undergo transformation and be- come more responsive to market prefer- ences. After all, few authors want to spend enormous amounts of time pro- ducing monographs that do not sell well. Some authors, however, might make the sacrifice once because they suspect that having written a monograph might be advantageous, assisting them in getting a particular job, a promotion, or tenure or earning them acclaim. 18 In summary, an assessment of the LIS monograph is long overdue. This paper " makes a modest beginning and encour- ages others to build from its preliminary research base. For the purposes of this study, the term "monograph" includes titles emanating from scholarly publish- ers: commercial houses, professional as- sociations, and university presses.19 These titles may convey research findings. Text- books that identify research and summa- rize the results of various studies fit within the scope of a monograph. Refer- ence works have been excluded in the belief that they merit separate analysis. OBJECTIVES The study objectives were to: • Determine the role and perceived im- portance of the LIS monograph to aca- demic library collection development. Importance is defined as the extent to which libraries purchase these mono- graphs; • Describe the perceptions of a sample of academic librarians regarding their use and nonuse of LIS monographs; • Identify issues affecting the use and nonuse of LIS monographs; and • Identify areas meriting further re- search. The author hopes that the results of the study will direct national and interna- tional discussion to the role and relative importance of the monograph to scholarly communication in LIS. Furthermore, this article may serve as a reminder to authors seeking journal publication that their lit- erature review should include all signif- icant works, including those published as monographs. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY Given the exploratory nature of the study, the lack of existing research on the perceptions of librarians toward the monographs of their profession and dis- cipline, and the need to obtain in-depth data to identify areas meriting further investigation, this researcher conducted a series of focus group and individual interviews during the spring, summer, and fall of 1990.20 Group interviews took place with librarians at three academic institutions that were members of the Academic Librarians 509 Association of Research Libraries (ARL). Located in the Midwest, South, and Southwest, the libraries selected were: • Geographically accessible to the in- vestigator; and • Willing to participate in the study. Willingness was defined as allowing five or more librarians to participate in focus group interviews. Two of the universities had graduate schools of LIS accredited by ALA. One university was selected because it did not have such a school. However, there are two such schools in the state. Focus group participants included ad- ministrators, selectors for the LIS collec- tion in the university library, librarians who have conducted research and been published, and those aspiring to write. To guide the discussion, the investigator relied on a basic set of interview questions that probed the perceived importance of monographs in comparison to journal ar- ticles; librarian use of monographs; how the librarians discovered titles; what types of monographs they consulted; whether they purchased personal copies of monographs or preferred to order ti- tles for the libraries' collections; and whether they borrowed monographs from other institutions. The investigator also shared the insights gained from pre- vious interviews so that the interviews built on each other and were compara- tive. In addition to the group interviews, the investigator conducted seven indi- vidual interviews with library school li- brarians and academic librarians at both ARL and non-ARL institutions. The non- ARL institutions offered doctoral degrees, and the librarians held faculty status re- quiring publication. Publication, how- ever, was not limited to the conduct and reporting of research. The purpose of the individual interviews was to obtain ad- ditional insights into the role of the LIS monograph and to ascertain the extent to which academic libraries have requested LIS monographs through interlibrary loan. The investigator also had the op- tion of comparing the views of librarians participating in group interviews to this different sample ·of academic librarians. 510 College & Research Libraries A total of forty-five academic librari- ans participated in the focus group and individual interviews. These interviews were conducted within a case study con- text and produced qualitative, not quan- titative, data.21 Case studies are useful both for exploratory research and for de- scriptive and explanatory purposes. Such a design is especially relevant for studying knowledge utilization because the topic covers a phenomenon insepa- rable from its context. 22 Furthermore, case studies focus on a specific target group and attempt to describe the subject's behaviors and the relationship of these behaviors to selected environ- mental variables or conditions. Such studies allow investigators to probe in depth, identify variables and proposi- tions that can serve to direct additional research, and "develop insight into basic aspects of human behavior ... [and] may lead to the discovery of previously un- suspected relationships." 23 The investigator assured participants that their comments would be kept con- fidential and not attributable to either a particular institution or a particular in- dividual. Group interview sessions gener- ally lasted one and one-half hours, while individual interviews lasted between thirty minutes and one hour. During an interview session, the investigator took brief notes summarizing the discussion. Later the same day, he reviewed the notes, expanding on the points made by partici- pants. The notes from the group and in- dividual interviews were analyzed together, with the results reported in this paper. QUALITY OF THE DATA To increase the reliability of the data, the investigator conducted two pretests with doctoral students at two LIS grad- uate schools. The students selected had all worked as academic librarians. The library science librarian at one of these schools also participated in the inter- view. The purpose of the pretests was to preview the procedures for conducting the focus group interviews and to iden- tify appropriate questions. The investi- gator added some questions based on the responses of the pretest participants. November 1991 Furthermore, he recorded the responses of the participants during the interview and then produced a detailed summary immediately after the completion of the interview. The same interview questions guided both the focus group interviews and the individual interviews, and there was a significant degree of similarity in the responses of the participants. Internal validity assesses the extent to which data collection procedures actu- ally measure what the investigator in- tends them to measure. The investigator, together with those interviewed, sug- gested examples of LIS monographs. Interviewees were encouraged to iden- tify one title that they had recently read or planned to read in the next month. Interestingly, they most frequently men- tioned Patricia S. Breivik and E. Gordon Gee's Infonnation Literacy, F. W. Lancaster's If You Want to Evaluate Your Library, or Nancy A. Van House et al.'s Measuring Academic Library Perfonnance.24 The inter- nal validity of the data was enhanced by matching questions within and across the group interviews and individual inter- views and by obtaining the opinion of practicing academic librarians as to whether the questions and definitions ac- curately represented the variables under study, that is, face validity. In an exploratory study such as this, greater attention is placed on reliability and internal validity than on external validity, or the generalizability of study findings to a larger population (e.g., type of academic library, a geographical re- gion, and all academic libraries in the United States). Thus, the investigator sacrificed generalizability of study find- ings to increase the study's reliability and internal validity, to identify propo- sitions meriting further research, to probe specific areas under investigation, and to obtain detailed insights into the phenomenon under investigation. There was insufficient financial support to place external validity on par with reliability and internal validity considerations. FINDINGS Practicing librarians consulting the pub- lished literature rely on articles,25 primar- ily from the more widely circulating journals26-those routed to them or re- ceived as part of professional association membership. Articles convey more timely information than do monographs. Many of the librarians interviewed used the lit- erature to identify individuals working on similar problems or tasks, and thereby attempt to expand their inter- personal networking. They regard monographs as secondary resources, ones not always essential to their collec- tion development and management prac- tices. Furthermore, they believe that most research appears in journals and that monographs take too long to read. If the author of a monograph has had a chap- ter of his or her work published as an article, those interviewed are often satis- fied with the reading of the summary article. They neither request the purchase of the monograph nor read it. Although the following findings un- derscore the size of a library's budget and the perceived utility of monographs, other factors influence selection. One of these factors is the anticipated amount of potential use. Institutions that do not offer LIS programs may be hard pressed to justify the purchase of monographs that have limited appealY An LIS mono- graph might interest only a couple of staff members. Another key issue relates to what the library should own or have nearby and what staff are willing to wait for on interlibrary loan. Either through planning or by default, many librarians interviewed place most LIS monographs under the province of interlibrary loan. Some of them were considering borrow- ing and examining selected works for possible purchase by the library. Quality of LIS Literature and the Specialization of the Literature Charles R. McClure and Ann Bishop, who interviewed nationally known re- searchers, discovered a belief that the quality of LIS research was improving. 28 Although the study reported in this arti- cle did not focus exclusively on research, it did probe librarian perceptions of the published literature: The librarians in- terviewed question the quality of much of Academic Librarians 511 the literature and do not consider its quality to be improving. 29 The critical issue for them becomes how to separate the quality works from the quantity that is published annually. The academic librarians pointed out that library literature has become more specialized and that it does not ade- quately cover major developments relat- ing to transborder data flow and other aspects of information policy. A study such as the one presented in this paper deals with the use of only one type of published literature. At the same time, the LIS literature is a subset of the social sciences literature. One librarian inter- viewed explained that "we need to jus- tify our literature better within the broader context so that our literature has a wider appeal." Collection Development One of the universities with a gradu- ate school of LIS had had a separate LIS collection since the 1970s. However, the university library was in the process of dismantling the separate collection and integrating the holdings into the general collection. The position oflibrary science librarian had been phased out, and one of the acquisitions librarians had re- cently taken over selection responsibili- ties for the LIS collection along with her other responsibilities. The librarians inter- viewed at this institution maintained that if the university did not have a library school, they would place more emphasis on the serials collection and deemphasize the acquisition of monographs. At one of the pretest sites, there was a separate library science collection and librarian. This collection contained only course-related materials. A librarian within the university library was charged with selection responsibilities. However, there was no coordination between the two librarians, and the library science librarian assumed that the university li- brary was developing a comprehensive collection of trs titles. This librarian had not checked on the accuracy of his as- sumption. The university library that did not have a graduate school of LIS presumed 512 College & Research Libraries that one of the two schools in the state maintained a comprehensive collection from which the staff could borrow if the need arose. One of the librarians inter- viewed from a western state university library explained that her library allot- ted only $200 per year for the purchase of LIS monographs. Because there was little hope that the library would pur- chase a requested title, she had little rea- son to submit book orders. At another library, the administration handled the purchase of LIS mono- graphs and tended to make the pur- chases in areas of personal interest to them. According to those interviewed, the collection was "adequate" for techni- cal services, but "weak" in other areas. Evidently, practices vary. It would seem, though, that libraries build more complete collections of LIS monographs when a particular person is charged with collection responsibilities, when the col- lection development policy covers the inclusion of LIS titles, and when a notifi- cation system alerts librarians that are- quested title has arrived. As one librarian explained, I often forget that I have requested a title. Without the notification system, the title would arrive and someone else would probably take it and keep it in his or her office. Consequently, without the system, there would be little incentive for me to place an order. Given the small budgets allocated for the purchase of LIS monographs, some librarians determine whether a title has general interest. If it does, they might order it from the general or departmen- tal fund to avoid drawing on the LIS budget. Others interviewed either di- rectly charge the LIS budget or do not bother placing an order for an LIS mono- graph.30 Clearly, there is great variation in the willingness of those interviewed to order LIS monographs for the library collection. Types of Monographs Preferred The librarians interviewed showed lit- tle interest in monographs that convey basic research and theory. Rather, they want how-to-do-it manuals, summaries November 1991 of the published literature, and statistics and research methods books that would be helpful in conducting and reporting research. Some of the librarians are inter- ested in the collection of reprinted arti- cles and textbooks. Regardless, the monographs should have a practical appli- cation and not merely add to knowledge or one's understanding of librarianship.31 Furthermore, the librarians do not expect monographs to convey timely informa- tion, but they do want the monographs to provide a broad overview. After all, · monographs can be an "integrating fac- tor for our fragmented daily life." Those interviewed regard mono- graphs as a general synthesis of timeless, not trendy, information. When mono- graphs become too introductory, they meet the needs of LIS students better than they do practicing academic librar- ians. Monographs may contain contrib- uted essays and thereby reflect different points of view. A collection of mono- graphs over time would reflect the think- ing of the time period and show the evolution of library theory, philosophy, research, and practice. Such a collection, however, would be low priority, except- ing perhaps at institutions ·serving LIS schools culminating in the award of a doctoral degree. As for topics on which they might like to see new monographs, the librarians suggested research methods, network- ing, the pace of change, information policy, and library applications of microcomputer software. Writings on research methods should contain numerous examples and enable readers to apply the principles to their work situations. As one librarian explained, "We do not know how to do research; we've never had to do it be- fore." Monograph Use by Library Managers At one ARL library, those in manage- rial positions are ·more likely than those in nonmanagerial positions to consult the monographic literature. The manag- ers believe that the literature contains useful writings, covering topics such as personnel matters. This finding sup- ports the research cited in endnote four. ... ... ; The librarians not holding managerial positions at this library emphasized that their jobs do not lend themselves to re- flection and integration of the literature. However, now that they have faculty sta- tus and are expected to write for publi- cation, they professed a desire to keep abreast of the published (predominantly periodical) literature in areas of immedi- ate interest. Monograph Publishers, Selection Sources, and the Purchase of Monographs Those librarians who use monographs tend to rely on titles distributed by the major publishers in the United States. Librarians at only one interview site ex- pressed interest in the acquisition of monographs produced in other countries: Australia, Canada, England, and New Zealand. Selectors of LIS monographs prefer to pick and choose titles instead of having their libraries maintain standing orders for all titles coming out in a particular book series or from a particular pub- lisher. These librarians peruse an- nouncements in American Libraries and in newsletters, examine publishers' fli- ers and catalogs, and browse reviews contained primarily in periodicals routed to them or in periodicals that they receive as part of professional associa- tion membership. The periodicals that they most often consult are Library Jour- nal and the Journal of Academic Librarian- ship. They also ask colleagues for recommendations. The librarians rely on the above-men- tioned mechanisms as filters for separat- ing quality works from the quantity of published literature. They consider them- selves too busy to spend great amounts of time searching for potentially useful ti- tles. (Librarians engaged in research and publication welcome the inclusion of Li- brary Literature on CD-ROM, but wish that all monographs would have de- scriptive titles reflecting their contents.) Few of the librarians interviewed pur- chase personal copies of LIS mono- graphs. They prefer to order titles for the library collection because the price for Academic Librarians 513 personal copies is often prohibitive. If they purchase a personal copy, that work is practical, consulted frequently, work- related, and a bench mark in the field. Nonetheless, they still might try to have the library purchase an office copy of the work. One librarian suggested that the unwillingness to purchase personal cop- ies might be the trait of a profession that does not pay well. Selectors of LIS monographs prefer to pick and choose titles instead of hav- ing their libraries maintain standing orders. The librarians interviewed do not need access to recently published mono- graphs. Because there is little institu- tional money for the purchase of this type of literature, they want some assur- ance that a work has utility. The assump- tion is that the work will remain in print or that other institutions will loan their copies. If the librarians decide that a title has utility, and assuming that they have not exceeded the small budget allocated for the purchase of LIS titles, they may re- quest a copy. Some librarians inter- viewed dislike spending a large sum for a short book-fewer than 200 pages. For them, cost is a key factor; after all, as one librarian declared, "I do not want to waste scarce library money." 32 Reasons for Using LIS Monographs Monographs provide background in- formation and an overview of a topic or an area and show what has been done in the past. They also might offer guidance for setting up a program or better con- ducting an operation, or a service. Monographs, as well as the literature as a whole, identify who is working on something; librarians thereby identify contacts. Participants in one focus group interview explained that they use the literature to identify the "big shots" and see what these people are doing. Because such individuals effect change, their writings are important. The next section 514 College & Research Libraries of the paper identifies another use of mono- graphs-research and publication. Promotion and Tenure Requirements Those interviewed realize that library school educators and some academic li- brarians facing promotion and tenure re- quirements may be unwilling to write practical guides or monographs. These individuals might have to produce works that are philosophical, theoreti- cal, and research based. The librarians interviewed, however, would probably not purchase such works. The librarians interviewed want how-to-do-it manuals, summaries of the published literature, and statistics and research methods books. Expectations that the librarians would engage in publication provide an incen- tive for them to consult the monographic literature. However, conversations with some librarians indicated a cavalier attitude toward the conduct of a litera- ture review. Two librarians interviewed had just submitted a proposal to a fund- ing organization. They had conducted no literature review, nor were they aware of the key writings on the topic. They intended to leave the search for relevant literature until after the pro- posal had been funded. The search would constitute the first phase of the project. Unfortunately, the existing liter- ature already covers the proposed proj- ect in some depth. Interlibrary Loan The prevailing attitude of many of the librarians is that "something important and potentially useful may fall through the cracks and not be purchased. This is only natural." When the staff need a monograph, or a portion of one, they can check OCLC or a similar networking utility to see which libraries own it; then they borrow the title through interlibrary loan. The librarians interviewed tend to identify the source of interlibrary bor- rowing of LIS monographs as academic November 1991 institutions having graduate schools of LIS. They assume that these schools, es- pecially the ones with doctoral programs, maintain comprehensive research-level · collections and would lend monographs, or photocopy or fax a chapter or selected pages. However, they have neither veri- fied the accuracy of this assumption nor attempted to borrow a work. TOPICS MERITING INVESTIGATION The pressure for librarians to perform research and publish depends on vari- ables such as an institution's promotion and tenure requirements, the librarians' faculty status, and the library's size.33 Faculty status requiring research and publication might be the catalyst for more academic librarians to consult the literature, especially monographs that are not how-to-do-it manuals. Therefore, studies might expand on this investiga- tion and examine in-depth faculty status at other doctoral-granting institutions. What types of literature do these librari- ans consult, produce, and cite? Research might explore the importance of publishing a monograph as a precondi- tion to obtaining promotion and tenure. W. Bede Mitchell and L. Stanislava Swieszkowski examined publication requirements and tenure approval rates. As part of their study, they probed whether or not re- sponding institutions gave librarians credit for different types of publica- tions. 34 Their research merits replication; the new research should test the compar- ative weight accorded a publication type. 35 The findings of such research might be included as part of a model depicting fully the variables on which institutions make promotion and tenure decisions.36 The study reported in this paper might be replicated among faculty and doc- toral students in graduate schools of LIS. Replication also might extend to librari- ans affiliated with public and other types of libraries, including academic institu- tions offering degrees other than the doc- torate. Given the importance of recognized library leaders and their writings, future research might build on Alice Gertzog' s •. T' · identification of leaders.37 Instead of merely listing leaders by library type, it might be beneficial to categorize them in the context of particular issues, prob- lems, and areas of librarian responsibil- ity-for example, reference service. In addition, there should be an attempt to identify the more important writings of these leaders. Conversations with some librarians indicated a cavalier attitude toward the conduct of a literature review. Research might explore the percep- tions of publishers and use content anal- ysis to examine patterns among the monographs mentioned in publishers' catalogs. Finally, research might probe, in greater depth, perceptions about top- ics inadequately covered in the mono- graphic literature and the relationship of LIS literature to the broader social sci- ences literature. CONCLUSION On the one hand, some publishers, ac- ademic librarians, and university pro- motion and tenure committees do not attach much importance to monographs. Some publishers have acknowledged a declining sales potential for the LIS mono- graph and have characterized this type of monograph as a dead or dying commodity as far as their publishing houses are con- cerned. 38 On the other hand, other publish- ers, including G. K. Hall & Co., have issued a call for authors. 39 Those interviewed tend to prefer a monograph that synthesizes existing lit- erature or is a how-to-do-it manual. Neal-Schuman produces such manuals as part of a series edited by Bill Katz, a professor at the State University of New York-Albany School of LIS and Policy. The librarians interviewed also encour- age fellow practitioners and faculty at graduate schools of LIS to prepare such manuals. However, they realize that these manuals may not factor into pro- motion and tenure decisions. At some universities, publication in the form of Academic Librarians 515 monographs does not seem to count for nearly as much as the placement of re- search articles in refereed journals.40 However, this may be more true for LIS faculty than for library faculty. Publishers and series editors wanting research-based monographs may have to implement a for- mal peer reviewing system in order to generate a more positive perception of monographs among some promotion and tenure committees.41 When libraries commit an increasing percentage of the materials budget to the periodicals collection and the use of technology, other collections, such as the monograph collection, may be penalized. According to one librarian interviewed, "It is easier to cancel monographs than to evaluate and get rid of serials. We focus more attention on serials and offer de- partments an incentive to cancel serials: we'll replace some with new orders." From discussions with academic librari- ans, it would seem that they value the periodical and monograph literature of other disciplines and professions more than LIS literature.42 Charges that LIS monographs vary substantially in qual- ity and rarely contain anything new may have some merit. On the other hand, these charges may provide a rationale for neglecting the purchase of LIS mono- graphs, conference proceedings, and other publication types. Charles R. McClure studied informa- tion source preferences among academic library decision makers.43 The librarians interviewed for this article displayed similar preferences. For decision mak- ing, they prefer the use of interpersonal sources, including electronic mail; with e-mail they can put out questions and obtain immediate information useful for decision making and problem resolu- tion. When they consult the professional literature, it is most likely that which is easily accessible-office copies of mono- graphs and journals to which the library subscribes. Faculty status and expectations that librarians will engage in publication un- derscore the fact that librarians prepar- ing reviews of the literature must include the major writings, be they jour- 516 College & Research Libraries nal articles, monographs, or so forth. The search for monographs synthesizing the published literature may be limited to the holdings of the immediate collection. The presumption is that the library indeed holds the significant works. An interesting, but perhaps not researchable, question is: "Do librarians submitting manuscripts for publication include the major works in their literature reviews, or must the editorial boards of refereed journals point out key omissions for potential authors to include as they revise their papers?" Looking toward the future, the LIS monograph will evolve in response pri- marily to market demands-the purchase preferences of libraries and the dissatisfac- tion of authors with book sales that do not match their expectations. When mono- graphs report original research, perhaps they should not merely relate the reflec- tive inquiry (problem statement, litera- ture review, theoretical framework, logical structure, objectives, hypotheses, and re- search questions), procedures (design and methodology), indicators of reliability and validity, limitations, and findings. Greater November 1991 attention might focus on the packaging, readability, and generalizability of the re- search.44 Yet popularizing research may have an adverse effect on promotion and tenure committees that expect research to conform to the scientific method and tech- nical report writing.45 In summary, the librarians inter- viewed accord high priority to the pur- chase of titles for academic departments and low priority to the collection of LIS monographs. When they do acquire their own literature, it is most likely in the form of a serial. Nonetheless, they claim satisfaction with their libraries' roles in acquiring LIS titles that support their professional needs.46 Regardless of the changes that the monograph may undergo, it will remain a secondary means for the dissemination of research and other information to the library communityY The journal article is indeed the primary vehicle for convey- ing published information. Publication of electronic journals will ensure this pre- eminence because librarians will gain ac- cess to more timely information. REFERENCES AND NOTES 1. Charles B. Osburn, "The Place of the Journal in the Scholarly Communications Sys- tem," Library Resources & Technical Services 28:323-24 (Oct. 1984). 2. In one study, ARL directors listed the following journals as the most significant for promotion and tenure in the following order: College & Research Libraries, LibranJ Quarterly, Journal of Academic Librarianship, Library Resources & Technical Services, Library Trends, Information Technology and Libraries, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Library Journal, American Libraries, and RQ. See David F. Kohl and Charles H. Davis, "Ratings of Journals by ARL Library Directors and Deans of LIS Schools," College & Research Libraries 46:40-47 (Jan. 1985). 3. See, for example, Carolyn 0. Frost, "The Literature of Online Public Access Catalogs, 1980-85: An Analysis of Citation Patterns," Library Resources & Technical Services 33:345 (Oct. 1989); Stephen Atkins, "Subject Trends in LIS Research, 1975-1984," Library Trends 36:635 (Spring 1988); Kohl and Davis, "Ratings of Journals by ARL Library Directors and Deans of LIS Schools," p.43; S. Nazim Ali, "LIS Literature: Research Results," International Library Review 17:120 (April 1985); S. Nazim Ali, "Library Science Re- search: Some Results of Its Dissemination and Utilization," Libri 35:160-61 (June 1985); S. Nazim Ali, "Attitudes and Preferences of Library Practitioners in Illinois to Channels for Dissemination of Research Results," College & Research Libraries 47:167 (Mar. 1986); and Peter Lynam, Margaret Slater, and Rennie Walker, Research and the Practitioner (London: Aslib, 1982), p.8. 4. Diane Mittermeyer and Lloyd J. Houser, "The Knowledge Base for the Administration of Libraries," Library Research 1:255-76 (Fall 1979); and Lloyd J. Houser and Wilma Sweaney, "Library Administration Literature: A Bibliometric Measure of Subject Dis- persion," Library Research 1:359-75 (Winter 1979). Academic Librarians 517 5. This is not to say that use of LIS journal literature is minimal. See Atkins, "Subject Trends in LIS Research"; and Dale S. Montanelli and Collette Mak, "Library Practitioners' Use of Library Literature," Library Trends 36:765-83 (Spring 1988). 6. Mittermeyer and Houser, "The Knowledge Base for the Administration of Libraries," p.273. 7. Sharon J. Rogers and Charlene S. Hurt, "How Scholarly Communication Should Work in the 21st Century," College & Research Libraries 51:5-6, 8 (Jan. 1990). 8. Calvin J. Boyer, The Doctoral Dissertation as an Information Source (Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow, 1973). 9. Beverly P. Lynch, "Research, Theory, and the Practice of LIS," in LIS Research: Perspec- tives and Strategies for Improvement, eds. Charles R. McClure and Peter Hernon (Nor- wood, N.J.: Ablex, 1991), p.360. 10. Sandra R. Moline, "The Influence of Subject, Publisher Type, and Quantity Published on Journal Prices," Journal of Academic Librarianship 15:12 (March 1989). See also Bernard M. Fry and Herbert S. White, Publishers and Libraries: A Study of Scholarly and Research Journals (Lexington, Mass.: Lexington Books, 1976). 11. Robin B. Devin and Martha Kellogg, "The Serial/Monograph Ratio in Research Librar- ies: Budgeting in Light of Citation Studies," College & Research Libraries 51:46-54 (Jan. 1990). 12. Volume 5 of LIS Annual (Englewood, Colo.: Libraries Unlimited, 1989), p.ix, includes more than 500 monographs, reference books, and periodicals for the United States, Canada, Great Britain, Australia, and India. The 500 represents a crude overestimation of the number of published monographs, assuming that the Annual provided com- prehensive coverage. 13. In regard to university presses, "very few have print orders over 1,000, many have less than 1,000 and estimates of typical sales run variously from 400 to 750 copies." See Chandler B. Grannis, "New Directions for University Presses," Library fournal11:74 (Aug. 1986). 14. Using data for only one year (September 1986 through August 1987), Paul Kobasa examined 300 titles available from the American Library Assn. He found that only thirty of these sold at least 1,000 copies. He categorized the thirty works as "reference" (eleven titles), "philosophical/theoretical" (two titles), and "practice/procedural" (seventeen titles). (His study definitely merits replication over a longer time period.) See Paul A. Kobasa, "Synergy, Not Cause and Effect: The Library Profession and Its Literature," Library Trends 36:695-708 (Spring 1988). 15. Lecture by Klaus G. Saur at Simmons College, July 12, 1990. 16. It is interesting to note that a newly established library school in Sierra Leone has asked libraries serving North American graduate schools of LIS for donations of books and journals. 17. The two publishers supplying this information as well as sharing the size of the print runs for many publishing houses requested that their names be withheld. 18. Research might probe the motivation for publication and the preparation of mono- graphs. "In answer to the obvious question, Why continue to produce titles in a category that does not sell well, it can be said that a professional association publisher [the American Library Assn.] has a service motive in addition to that of profit .... There may be a sense that philosophical/theoretical works-'serious' works, scholarly works-somehow legitimize a publishing program overall in the eyes of library professionals. These items position the publisher as a significant source of professional information. In other words, there is a value to pursue beyond that of numbers of copies sold-i.e., a wish to contribute to theory development in the profession in order to compete effectively for the attention of the profession in the marketplace of more lucrative products." See Kobasa, "Synergy, Not Cause and Effect," p.701. 19. Examples of these publishers include Ablex Publishing Corp., the American Library Assn., G. K. Hall & Co., Greenwood Press, Libraries Unlimited, Meckler Corp., Neal- Schuman, Oryx Press, Saur, and Scarecrow Press. The study excludes Haworth Press and its reprinting of journal issues as monographs. 518 College & Research Libraries November 1991 20. For a discussion of focus groups see David L. Morgan, Focus Groups as Qualitative Research (Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage, 1988); Richard A. Krueger, Focus Groups (New- bury Park, Calif.: Sage, 1988); and David W. Stewart and Prem N. Shamdasani, Focus Groups: Theory and Practice (Newb':lry Park, Calif.: Sage, 1990). 21. See, for example, Michael Q. Patton, Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods (New- bury Park, Calif.: Sage, 1990); Matthew B. Miles and A. Michael Huberman, Qualitative Data Analysis (Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage, 1984); Robert C. Bogdan and Sari K. Biklen, Qualitative Research for Education (Boston: Allyn & Bacon, 1982); and C. A. Mellon, Naturalistic Inquiry for Library Science (New York: Greenwood, 1990). 22. See Robert K. Yin, Case Study Research (Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage, 1989). 23. Donald Ary, Lucy Cheser Jacobs, and Asghar Razavieh, Introduction to Research in Education, 3d ed. (New York: Holt, 1985), p.323. 24. Patricia S. Breivik and E. Gordon Gee, Information Literacy (New York: American Council on Education/Macmillan, 1989); F. W. Lancaster, If You Want to Evaluate Your Library (Champaign: Univ. oflllinois,GraduateSchool of LIS, 1988); and Nancy A. Van House, Beth T. Weil, and Charles R. McClure, Measuring Academic Library Performance .,..._ (Chicago: American Library Assn., 1990). 25. Beverly P. Lynch, University of California, Los Angeles, before the Library Research Round Table, American Library Association, June 23,1990. 26. Nancy A. Van House, University of California, Berkeley, before the Library Research Round Table, American Library Association, June 23, 1990. S. Nazim Ali, however, would substitute "scholarly and middle-of-the-road" for "widely circulating." See Ali, "Library Science Research," p.160-61. 27. The assumption is that all titles ordered for academic disciplines are indeed used. See Allen Kent, Jacob Cohen, K. L. Montgomery, James A. Williams, Stephen Bulich, Roger P. Flynn, William N. Sabor, and Una Mansfield, Use of Library Materials (New York: Dekker, 1979). 28. Charles R. McClure and Ann Bishop, "The Status of Research in Library /Information Science: Guarded Optimism," College & Research Libraries 50:127-43 (Mar. 1989). 29. One librarian believes that "we could cut the number of LIS journals and monographs in half, with no significant loss of information." 30. The collection management guidelines at one library emphasize that the budget for a department will have a proportion of serials and monographs. (This does not apply to the LIS collection.) A department may expend more than that allotted for its serials holdings. The library also needs technology and takes the funds from whatever budget it can. If the librarians see something that is important, such as a CD-ROM service, they may pick it up on a trial basis and charge the expenditure to the monograph budget. If they decide to continue with the service, they shift funding to another budget. 31. For supporting evidence that librarians rate as most important research having prac- tical application, see notes 3 and 5. Several of those interviewed believe that library educators "look down on practice" and treat theory at the expense of practice. For these practitioners to purchase monographs written by library educators, the works would have to emphasize practice and be useful in their everyday work. 32. After examining ALA sales records for one year, Kobasa concluded that "approxi- mately 90 percent of ... [ALA's best-sellers] cost less than $30; 75 percent cost less than $20." See Kobasa, "Synergy, Not Cause and Effect," p.702. 33. See Sylvia C. Krausse and Janice F. Sieburth, "Patterns of Authorship in Library Journals by Academic Librarians," The Serials Librarian 9:132 (Spring 1985). 34. W. Bede Mitchell and L. Stanislava Swieszkowski, "Publication Requirements and Tenure Approval Rates: An Issue for Academic Librarians," College & Research Libraries 46:249-55 (May 1985). 35. It also might be useful to replicate Karen F. Smith, Tamara V. Frost, Amy Lyons, and Mary Reichel, "Tenured Librarians in Large University Libraries," College & Research Libraries 45:91-98 (Mar. 1984). 36. Development of such a model becomes more important as some of the major research universities contemplate fundamental change, including the formulation of a new paradigm to guide higher education in the future. See Karen Grassmuck, "Some ~ ~ t- ... 1' Academic Librarians 519 Research Universities Contemplate Sweeping Changes, Ranging from Management and Tenure to Teaching Methods," The Chronicle of Higher Education 37:A1, A29-A31 (Sept. 12, 1990). 37. Alice Gertzog, "Library Leaders: Who and Why?" Library Journal115:45-51 (July 1990). 38. See note 17. . 39. G. K. Hall & Co. issued a call for authors of scholarly monographs, handbooks, textbooks, management guides, and collections of essays. Its interests include, but are not limited to, the following areas: library automation and technology, library man- agement and administration, fundamentals of librarianship, information policy and strategy, information science, school media librarianship, comparative and interna- tional librarianship, communications, and information management." Letter from Carol C. Chin, Senior Editor, G. K. Hall & Co., to professors at graduate schools of LIS, April1990. 40. In contrast to this finding, Joyce Payne and Janet Wagner discovered "that the form of publication was less significant [for promotion and tenure requirements] than the fact of publication." This study, published in 1984, merits replication. See Joyce Payne and Janet Wagner, "Librarians, Publication, and Tenure," College & Research Libraries 45:138 (Mar. 1984). One librarian questioned the generalizability of this finding. He believes 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46 . 47. that "this may vary between institutions, between an institution's school of LIS and its department of library services, and with type of monograph-research versus re- printed essays, etcetera." Social judgment analysis might provide a useful framework for the conduct of such an investigation. See Ann McCartt, "The Application of Social Judgment Analysis to Library Faculty Tenure Decisions," College & Research Libraries 44:345-57 (Sept. 1983). One librarian suggested that the prizing of literatures other than LIS may reflect "ignorance of the shortfalls of other disciplines' literature. We are aware of the short- falls of our own literature." Charles R. McClure, Information for Academic Library Decision Making (Westport, Conn.: Greenwood, 1980). One librarian suggested that the body of a research-based monograph might. contain an introduction to the topic, a summary of the findings, and a discussion of the "importance of findings .to day-to-day library operations." An appendix could contain a detailed presentation of findings, the study design, and methodology. Placement of these items in the appendix means that "not everyone needs to read them." Some librarians may attempt to get two versions of a study published-one for a popular periodical and the other for a scholarly journal. S. Nazirn Ali found a similar degree of satisfaction among his respondents. See Ali, "Attitudes and Preferences of Library Practitioners," p.168. Publishing houses, such as Pantheon Books, are shifting "away from medium-selling books toward more popular titles." Clearly, the types of problems discussed in this paper transcend LIS and have a profound impact on the social sciences and humanities. See Sanford Thatcher, "Scholarly Monographs May Be the Ultimate Victims of the Upheavals in Trade Publishing," The Chronicle of Higher Education 37:B3 (Oct. 10, 1990). When it comes to academic inventory, these cats cover every subject. You can count on Baker & Taylor Books for a first fill rate that's second to none. It's not surprising. With 400,000 academic books in our inventory, Baker & Taylor Books delivers a first fill rate that's twice that of any other academic vendor. Over 35% of all academic books on order are shipped within five work- ing days. And over 90% of titles are shipped or reported within 90 days. You can count on specialized titles from scholarly, research and scientific publishers, societal and association presses, university and small presses. And, you can expect more than just current titles. We inventory more than 167,000 academic books printed before 1988. You'll even have the benefit of the most sophisticated electronic search and purchase system on the market today- B&T Link™. It offers un- precedented accuracy with a 1.2 million title database on CD-ROM, and the fastest, easiest ordering system around. When it comes to meeting your most demanding academic book needs, Baker & Taylor Books is in a class by itself. For more information, call Baker & Taylor Books. BAKER & TAYLOR Books a GRACE Dis tribut ion co mpany WE'RE LEADING THE WAY.® © 1991 Baker & Taylor Books t