College and Research Libraries


curate reference to the contents of the 

volume. F o r m a t and typography are w e l l 

adapted to the subject matter and add to 

the ease of use. 

L a t e r editions may see improvement, 

but it is difficult to believe that this first 

edition of American Junior Colleges w i l l 

not prove as indispensable to adminis-

trators, students, and librarians as has its 

predecessor, A merican Universities and 

Colleges.—Lois E. Engleman, Frances 

Shimer Junior College Library, Mount 

Carroll, III. 

The Junior College Library Program. 

H a r l e n M a r t i n A d a m s . Joint publica-

tion of the A m e r i c a n L i b r a r y Associa-

tion and Stanford University Press, 

Stanford U n i v e r s i t y , C a l i f . , 1940. xii, 

92p. $2. 

T H I S is a very useful book. In its 
t w e l v e pages of introduction and ninety-

t w o pages of text, it reviews and epito-

mizes the literature on the junior college 

library. It dismisses the quantitative 

standards of past years and pleads for an 

active, educational, cooperative program 

based on conscious analysis of school and 

library functions. T h e data of the book 

w e r e derived from the 136 junior colleges 

(out of 178 selected by the C a r n e g i e C o r -

poration for visitation) which replied to a 

questionnaire. Reference is made through-

out the volume to current aims and prac-

tices; hence, its vitality and appeal. F o l -

l o w i n g a short introduction stating scope 

and plan of the book are six chapters: ( 1 ) 

Standards and f u n c t i o n s ; ( 2 ) T h e library 

and the curriculum (trends and correla-

tions) ; ( 3 ) T h e library and the student 

(instruction, guidance, silent reading, 

reading p r o g r a m ) ; ( 4 ) Administration 

and o r g a n i z a t i o n ; ( 5 ) T h e new library 

program at M e n l o Junior C o l l e g e ( C a l i -

f o r n i a ) ; ( 6 ) Selected basic principles. 

Bibliography and index f o l l o w . M o s t 

stimulating, perhaps, are the t w o chapters 

on trends in function and curriculum cor-

relation and the account of the M e n l o 

R e a d i n g C o u n c i l . O n e w o u l d judge that 

the library at M e n l o really functions. 

It is interesting to note the trends in 

junior college library literature. M i s s 

Ermine Stone's book1 states the accepted 

junior college library functions as com-

pletely and effectively as does the present 

book, but stresses organization, finances, 

and to some extent quantitative standards. 

D r . B. L a m a r Johnson's description of the 

Stephens C o l l e g e library plan2 emphasizes 

the central activity of the library in the 

instructional program and demands a 

broad concept of library materials. T h e 

present book makes a fresh statement of 

current practices and trends t o w a r d in-

tegration, correlation, and planned library 

participation in the educational process. 

I t is to be noted, perhaps, that all three 

of these landmark books are w r i t t e n by 

librarians of private junior colleges. 

M e d i t a t i o n upon these books in connec-

tion w i t h D r . W a l t e r  C . Eells' recent 

directory-summary3 leads one to feel that 

over 575 junior colleges ( w i t h 196,000 

students) have many of the same prob-

lems that confront the four-year colleges 

and universities. It does not seem to the 

reviewer, however, that  w e may transfer 

and apply directly and completely the 

experiences and inferences of a junior col-

lege library program to a four-year col-

lege. A f t e r all, a two-year " p r e p a r a t o r y " 

program is but the first t w o years of 

college, even though some junior colleges 

1 Stone, E r m i n e . The Junior College Library. 
A . L . A . , 1932. 

2 J o h n s o n , B. L a m a r . Vitalising a College Library. 
A.L.A., 1939. 

3 Eells. W a l t e r Crosby, ed. American Junior Col-
leges. A m e r i c a n Council on E d u c a t i o n , 1940. 

154 ' COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES 



perhaps do their t w o years better than do 

some colleges. A n d a two-year " t e r m i n a l " 

program is w h a t it is—vocational, ter-

minal. A n d a " c o m m u n i t y - c u l t u r a l " pro-

gram is only half of the college liberal 

arts program, even though the junior col-

leges sometimes do it better because com-

pression of time requires more definite 

aims. M u c h " c o l l e g e " teaching w o u l d 

benefit by the definition and correlation 

of a librarian-dean of instruction, but do 

you see it in operation in that form at 

D a r t m o u t h , or Swarthmore, or M a c a l -

ester, or Pomona, for example? 

A l l our libraries, both junior college 

and college, are somewhat in the position 

of a heavily loaded transcontinental pas-

senger t r a i n : w h e n the railway manage-

ment puts on t w o engines ( f o r the train 

must get through) but only one diner 

(passengers stand in line for f o o d ) . A 

full-fledged library program must go along 

w i t h the first-class c o l l e g e . — W i l l i s Kerr, 

Claremont Colleges Library, Claremont, 

Calif. 

Report of a Survey of the University of 

Mississippi Library for the University 

of Mississippi. By  A .  F . K u h l m a n , as-
sisted by Icko Iben. University, M i s -

sissippi, 1940. 164P. ( M i m e o g r a p h e d ) 

A T THE REQUEST of Chancellor Butts, 
D r .  A .  F . K u h l m a n , assisted by D r . Icko 
Iben, has prepared this report of a survey 

" t o measure the adequacy of the ( U n i v e r -

sity of Mississippi) library as a means of 

attaining the objectives set in the teaching, 

research, and public service program of 

the university and to suggest w a y s and 

means for improving i t . " T h e report 

begins w i t h "the economic resources of the 

state and the university" and "an outline 

of the essentials in an effective univer-

sity l i b r a r y . " T h e s e introductory chap-

ters are followed by chapters on book 

resources, physical plant and equipment, 

personnel, organization and administra-

tion, use, financial support, and govern-

ment of the library. T h e report is w e l l 

arranged and clearly presented for con-

venient use. P a r t I is a concise " S u m -

mary and Recommendations." P a r t  I I is 

the body of the report. T h e arrangement 

is helped by division of the statistical data 

into shorter tables in the text w i t h longer 

ones at the end as appendices to the main 

w o r k . 

L i b r a r y science profits from the fact 

that the authors of a survey must discover 

or create standards, set up comparative 

tables, and find and utilize "check lists," 

or "yardsticks," to test and measure the 

library under consideration. U n f o r t u n -

ately, this is a report on a w e a k institu-

tion in a very poor state. Consequently, 

the tables, lists, comparisons, and discus-

sions to show its condition and needs seem 

at times a little like a highly complicated 

anti-aircraft gun set up where a fly swatter 

w o u l d do the trick. Precise survey meth-

odology does not get a hard test in a 

survey of this collection of 67,000 vol-

umes, in a large measure obsolete, and 

supported by annual appropriations of 

something like $6,000 per year for the 

purchase of books.  A t the same time, one 

interested in survey techniques may w o n -

der if the devices used w o u l d be enough 

to test and measure accurately the condi-

tion and needs of a better institution. 

T h e report has a purpose, however, and 

for this it is w e l l designed.  I t is thorough 

and detailed. It should serve as a sound 

basis for library development at the U n i -

versity of Mississippi for many years to 

come. T h e authors patiently point out 

the needs and recommend steps for im-

provement. T h e s e range from the pri-

MARC hi, 1941 155