The Status of Chemistry Library Collections and Services Pamela G. Kobelski' and Michael F. Allan2 Science and Engineering Library, State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo. NY 14260 Access to a large number and wriety of information sources isof criti(.aI impurrance to iwarlemicchemist~.Organi7inr librarv collections and services to nrovide this access has hien c~mpliraterlby the increasing amount and cost of the scientitic litentture at times of stahlt~orshrinking librarv" budeets and staff. The lack of information on howother academic institutions cope with these problems has been an additional problem. Broberg and Dunbar ( I ) completed a survey of chemistry library collections and services in 1951. A survey of faculty attitudes toward chemistry libraries was completed by Pyle ( 2 )in 1972 but included little information outside of library configurations. Both surveys were addressed to department chairmen, and there was little distinction made between departmental collections and services and library collections and services. This study reports the results of a two-part survey designed to collect more current and comprehensive data on the oreanization of chemical libraries. A questionnaire was sent to 6 e chemistry, science, or head librarian requesting information on the collections and services maintained by the library. A supplementary questionnaire asking for data on the structure of the department and departmental literature collectionswas sent to the chairman of the chemistry department. The surveys were sent to all 178 American universities listed in the ~
~
~
~~~
~~~
~
-
' Author to whom all corresoondence should be sent
Present address. ~ e c h n c a nformatlonCenter. Banen/ Products Dlvis~on,Union Carblae Corporat~on.Cleveland, OH 44101
"Directory of Graduate Research" (3). Survey forms were numbered to allow library and departmental responses to be matched and to allow the inclusion of other statistical data including Roose and Anderson (4)and Gourman ( 5 )rankines of the department, as well as uni&sity enrollment and to& library holdings ( 6 ) .The return rate was quite good. Of the questionnaires sent to the libraries, 149 (83.7%) were completed and returned. Department chairmen returned 144 (80.9%). Responses to both questionnaires were received from 118 institutions (66.3%). Library Configurallon The Pyle study identified three main library configurations. They were the central library, where all or most of the library collections were housed in a sinele buildine. the science library, where collections in the sciences or 'the sciences and engineering were housed in one facility, and the deuartmental library where the chemistry co~lectibnwas housed alone. In the present survey, libraries housing chemistry and up to three other disciplines have also been regarded as departmental libraries. The Pyle study found that 33%of the departments surveyed had collections in a central library, 21% in a science library, and 44% in a departmental library. The present survey of libraries showed the following configurations. Central Library Science Library Departmental Library Chemistry only with other disciplines No Answer
Volume 59
46 44
(30.9%) (29.5%)
58
(38.9%) (18.1%) (20.8%)
27
31 1
( 0.7%)
Number 7 July 1982
569
The study by Broberg and Dunbar asked only about departmental libraries and did not distinauish between reading rooms maintained by the department and departmental 1; braries. That survev indicated that 79% of the universities surveyed h:id departmental lil~rarieior reading rooms. 01 the 90 cmtrnl a,r science lil)r:lrici rt.dponding 1,) thv present survey, 38 (42.2%) indicated that the chemistry department maintained a separate reading room, giving a total of 96 (64%) institutions with denartmental libraries or readina rooms. It is thought th;it larger, morr highly regarded ;choc,ls have denartmental lihraries. 'l'hr results uf this study suDport that contention. Of the top 34 institutions in the ~ o o & a n dAuderson studv. 17 (60.7%) of those respondina to the present survey repiked departmental libraries as-opposed to 23 (28.4%) of the unranked institutions. The figures are similar for the responses of those in the top 20 in the Gourman graduate ranking, of which 12 (75%) had departmental libraries as opposed to 31 (30.1%) of the unranked institutions. Departmental libraries were also more prevalent in institutions with large enrollments; 17 (56.7%) of those with over 25,000 students had departmental lihraries. The size of the department was also found to be related to library configuration. Of those departments with over 30 faculty members, 16 (48.5%) renorted denartmental libraries. Of those with over 120 graduate studenu, 16 t72.7";) rvported departmental lihraries. Of the departtnents reporting more than S1.5 milliun in r r se,lrch funds, 13 (>Ore) reported departmental lihmries.The re>ults ut'rhis survev indicate that dcputmental lihraries are the primary meansbf housing chemistry collections a t large and/or highly rated institutions. ~
~~~~
Size of Collections In the Brobere and Dunhar studv. . . 53% of the libraries reported recri\,in:: Iris than 1U periodical subscriptions, and only 19": rrr)urted receiving over 100. 'l'he number of ~eriodical subscr$tions in the area of chemistry reported in the present study are the following: less than 100 titles 100-150 titles 150-200 titles 200-250 titles over 250 titles no answer This data indicates a growth in the number of periodicals available to academic chemists. The reported total size of the collections books and bound journals in chemistry is equally impressive. less than 10.000 volumes 10,000-20,000 volumes 20,000-30,000 volumes 30,00040,000 volumes over 40,000 volumes no answer
22 43 32 17 25 10
114.8%) (28.9%) (21.5%) (11.4%) (16.8%) ( 6.7%)
A disturbing trend, however, was the number of libraries that are n o lotiger ahle to maintain suhacriptioni tu standard chemical refermu. twls. Thc survey listed iive major tools: Ch~,micol4bkrracls. Heil~rri:~ iiondbuch dvr 0r:aniwhen Chcrntv, Crnrlin tlondbuch d r r Anorganischun Chtvnip. Londd-Bornstcin %ahlcnu crrr und Funl;tionun aus 1'h)sil;. ('heniiz. Azlrr.nwn~c,(;rwph\\ih urzd Twhnik and Sadtler S ~ e c t rc~~llectiuns. l I.il~rarirsu,tw aiked if these works werr aGailable in the library housing the chemistry collection and if these works were on asubscription or standing order basis. All 149 institutions reported Chemical Abstracts was available, but in 5 cases, (3.4%), it was not on subscription. Of the 136 (91.3%) lihraries having Beilstein, 116 (77.9%) had it on standing order. For Gmelin, 130 (87.2%) libraries reported haviue holdines. but onlv 102 (68.5%) maintained a standing order.%f the i l l(74.5%jlihrarieshaving an dolt-~ornstei; only 86 (57.7%) had a standing order. For Sadtler Spectra 570
Journal of Chemical Education
collections, 104 (69.8%) libraries reported having them, but only 69 (46.3%) reported subscriptions. Subscription costs of these works have increased to the ~ o i nthat t all run several thousand dollars per year. The number of university lihraries which are unable to maintain subscri~tionsto these works suggests that the picture is even more dismal for college libraries. Hours, Services and Staff Rrohere and Dunbar found that 60% of the libraries thev surveyed were open 8 0 0 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. Monday through Fridav and 8 0 0 A.M. to 1200 noon Saturdav. a total of 49 hours. Only 40% reported longer hours. ~ i b i a r i e shousing chemistry collections reported the following hours in the present survey.
-~~
~
less than 50 hours 50-10 70-90 90-110 over 110
12 20 42 62 11
( 8.0%)
(13.4%) (26.2%) (41.6%) ( 7.4%)
The increase in hours is occuring primarily in science and central libraries; 47 (81%) of the departmental libraries reported being open less than 90 hours per week, while 61 (67.7%) of the science and central libraries re~ortedbeina-oven . more than 90 hours per week. Broberg and Dunbar gave no data but indicated that, eenerallv, staff and .. de~artmental . graduate students had after-hoursaccess to library collections. In response to the present survey, 72 (41.9%)institutions reported having after-hour access as compared to 100 (58.1%) institutions which reported that such access was not available. After-hours access was usually possible in departmental libraries; 50 (86.2%)of these libraries reported that collections were available outside of regularly scheduled hours. Such access was reported in only 11 (25%) of the science libraries and 1 (2.2%) central librarv. Reference service a t the library housing the chemistry collection was available in 134 (90.6%) of the libraries surveyed. In 118 (79.2%) of the libraries, over 30 hours of reference service per week was provided. On-line bibliographic search services were available in 142 (95.3%) libraries, but in only 108 (72.5%) was the service available in the library housing the chemistry collection. The technical expertise needed to provide on-line literature search services may be responsible for the number of institutions reporting staff members with formal training in chemistrv. Of the libraries answerine the survev. 106 (71.1%) reported0staff members having SUCK training. 'The reported level of course work completed was the following: undergraduate courses B.A.1B.S. in Chemistry graduate courses M.A.1M.S. in Chemistry Ph.D. in Chemistry
47 24 15 13 5
(45.2%) (23.1%) (14.4%) (12.5%) ( 4.8%)
Departmental Reading Rooms In addition to facilities and literature supported by the university library, many chemistry departments maintain seDarate de~artmentallibraries or readina rooms. Previous qtudies have tsiled t o make ,I clrw diitiln tion hetween lihraly and departmt:ntal tncht~es.Ovt.rall. ti.3 (:i7..If': I uf the lti9 institutions answering the question reported separate chemistry readings rooms maintained by the department. The distinction between library and departmental facilities was not always clear. In some cases questionnaires indicated librarv materials were located in these reading" rooms. Reading rooms appear to be a response to the restricted accessibility of chemistry collections housed in a central library. The library configurations for those universities reporting departmental reading room was the following: Departmental Reading Room Departmental Library Science Library Central Library
11 11
27
(19.0%) (26.8%) (61.4%)
There is also an increase in the number of denartments maintaining separate reading rooms if the chemistr; collection is not accessible outside of regular hours. Of the 82 institutions which did not allow after-hour access, 36 (43.9%) reported the presence of departmental reading rooms. Reading rooms are also moreprevalent in lower-ranked institutions. Results for institutions ranked in the Roose and Anderson and also the Gourman studies as opposed to unranked schools indicated the following numher had departmental reading rooms. Ranked Roose & Anderson Unranked Ranked Gourman Unranked
15 35 8 42
(29.4%) (44.9%) (19.0%) (41.2%)
Departmental questionnaires indicated the following material housed in these reading rooms. Current Journals Journal runs Books Reference books Treatises Chemical Abstracts While personal subscriptions to journals may not be too expensive, reference hooks, treatises, and Chemical Abstracts could easily involve a large expenditure of funds. The rather large percentage of reading rooms containing these materials would indicate an appreciable commitment of funds to departmental reading rooms. Overall, there is a pattern of departmental or multidenartmental libraries a t large. - . hiehlv - .ranked institutions. and science or central libraries and departmental reading rooms a t smaller, lower-ranked schools. This suggests that attempts a t saving library funds by centralizing collections could end UP costing the universitv more in terms of both facultv time a i d maintenance costs of a departmental reading rook. lnstructlon in Chemical Literature In compiling the survey, questions on the status of ins t ~ r t i o nin the literature "f r h e n ~ i s t vwrre addressed u, both liliriirie and departments. Surveys on l i h r a o imtruction programs were conducted hy ~ a h o d a(7) in 1953 and Martin and Rohinson ( 8 ) in 1969. Jahoda found formal chemistry literature courses in 32 (42.1%) of the 76 universities responding to his survey. o f those courses, 24 (75%) were taught by members of the chemistry department and 8 (25%) by librarians. Of the 157 Ph.D.-granting institutions responding to the Martin and Rohinson survev. 60 (38.9%) offered a forma1 course in the literature of chemistry while97 (61.1%) did not. Of those 60 courses, 52 (86%) were taught by chemists, 7 (12%) by librarians and 1 (2%) by a scientist from another field. Library and departmental responses on the presence of a course in the literature of chemistry in the present study were the following: course in literature of chemistry course in a related field
no course
58 6 111
(33.2%) ( 3.4%)
(63.4%)
Instruction responsibility for the course in the literature of chemistry was reported as the following: member of chemistry faculty facultyllihrarianteam librarian no answer
The increased participation of librarians in chemical literature courses, particularly through facultvAibrarian teams. seems to he a difinite trend. It isunfortunatr that the percentage ofuniversitics olirringsurh courses has, ifanything, derlined. Desoite rhr. incnlnsine r~rnnlexitvof the srientif:~: literature, les8 than half of the institutionssurveyed offered formal instruction in chemical or scientific literature.
" .
Conclusions The imoortance of lihrarv facilities to chemical education isclearly !hewn in thecriteki which theAiilr.ricanChemical Suciel). (:ornrnittee on I'rol'essi~mal'I'mining uses to waluatr Criteria directly ri.lstin:: to l i undergrad~intrprugrami (9). hrary facilities include the t'ollowing: ~
~
~
~~
~~
~~
There i h d d he n minimum inla1 least 20currrnt prriodicali. w i t h h c k runrufntr lr..sthau IO ycari,anclarsngpi,iorher n I r r e w r mawriais. The Intrer rhuuld cuntain itme journnls fnm other countries, and if there is a foreign language requirement, one or more journals in that language should he available. If the library holdings do not include Beilstein and, particularly, Chemical Abstracts, the committee will seek concrete evidence that the students learn how to use these important references. This might he done, for instance, via facilities permitting computer searches of Chemical Abstracts, or by use of the Science Citation Index and similar alternatives. The relative need for Chemical Abstracts, Beilstein, and other reference materials should determine their availability in the library. If, for instance, Beilstein is an important reference for a particular program, it should he included in the library. Larger library holdings are necessary where independent study and research are emphasized. A reading room is also stronglv recommended for institutions having centralized lihrar; facilities. Overall, the graduate schools responding to the survev meet these criterin. T ~ Lmajority . of the institutions with crntral lihmries do have readiny nxiini. All the lihraries sur\,eved had well over the 20 period&al minimum. While most schools reported having Chemical Abstracts, Beilstein, and other major reference tools, the difference between thenumber of schools having these works and the number having them on subscriotion mav he indicative of notential Drohlems. As these works continue to climb in price, more libraries may he forced to cancel suhscriotions. This. combined with the nercentaee of institutions ;ithout a formal course in the literature of chemistry, means that graduate schools cannot assume that incoming students are familiar with major reference tools and that they know how to conduct an effective, comnrehensive literatuie search.
Literature Cited (1) Broberg, J. W.snd D0nbar.R. E.. J. CHEM.EDUC.. 28,435436 11951l. (2) Pyle, J.L., J. CHEM.EDUC.,49,697-69s (1872). (3) " D i d r y of Graduate Research? American Chemical Society, Washington, D. C.. 1977. "iL... "i" -. ..
14) R~oose,K. D. and Andenon, C. J , " A RatingofGraduste Progrms,"American Council on Education, Washington, D. C., 1970, pp. 92-93. (5) Gourman. J,"The Gourman Report:A Rating af Gradusfe and Professional Programs in American and International Universities: National Educational Standards, Loa A n g d e , 1980. p. 18. (6) "The College Blue Book: Tabular Data,"16th Ed., The MscMillm Co.. New York, 1917 .....
38 8 11 1
(65.5%) (13.8%) (19.0%) ( 1.7%)
(7) Jahoda, G. J. CHEM EDUC..30.245-246 119531 (8) Martin, D.F. andRobinson, D.E. J. Chem. Doc..9.95-99 (1969). (9) American Chemical Society. Committee on Professional Training. "Undergraduate Professional Education in Chemistry: Criteria and h l u a t i n Procedures,"American Chemical Society, Washington, 0. C., 1977, p. 16.
Volume 59
Number 7 July 1982
571
