Faculty-library teamwork in book ordering

College and Research Libraries

Volumn 59, Issue 6, 1998, Pages 524-533

  Neville, Robert ^a   Williams III, James ^a   Hunt, Caroline C ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0032328876     PISSN: 00100870     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.5860/crl.59.6.523     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. To minimize confusion, the authors refer to nonlibrary faculty as "faculty" or "professors" and to credentialed library staff as "librarians," although in many institutions, including theirs, librarians hold faculty rank. The authors would like to thank David Cohen, Dean of Libraries, and Katina Strauch, head of Collection Development, who reviewed this article at several stages and pointed out this and other possible ambiguities.
2. William A. Britten and Judith D. Webster, "Comparing Characteristics of Highly Circulated Titles for Demand-Driven Collection Development," College & Research Libraries 53 (1992): 206-14; Dan C. Hazen, "Collection Development Policies in the Information Age," College & Research Libraries 56 (1995): 29-31; Dennis P. Carrigan, "Collection Development-Evaluation," Journal of Academic Librarianship 22 (July 1996): 273-78.
3. William A. Britten and Judith D. Webster, "Comparing Characteristics of Highly Circulated Titles for Demand-Driven Collection Development," College & Research Libraries 53 (1992): 206-14; Dan C. Hazen, "Collection Development Policies in the Information Age," College & Research Libraries 56 (1995): 29-31; Dennis P. Carrigan, "Collection Development-Evaluation," Journal of Academic Librarianship 22 (July 1996): 273-78.
4. William A. Britten and Judith D. Webster, "Comparing Characteristics of Highly Circulated Titles for Demand-Driven Collection Development," College & Research Libraries 53 (1992): 206-14; Dan C. Hazen, "Collection Development Policies in the Information Age," College & Research Libraries 56 (1995): 29-31; Dennis P. Carrigan, "Collection Development-Evaluation," Journal of Academic Librarianship 22 (July 1996): 273-78.
5. Patricia Buck Dominguez and Luke Swindler, "Cooperative Collection Development at the Research Triangle University Libraries: A Model for the Nation," College &Research Libraries 54 (1993): 470-96; Paul Metz, "Quantifying the Workload of Subject Bibliographers in Collection Development," Journal of Academic Librarianship 17 (Nov. 1991): 284-87.
6. Patricia Buck Dominguez and Luke Swindler, "Cooperative Collection Development at the Research Triangle University Libraries: A Model for the Nation," College &Research Libraries 54 (1993): 470-96; Paul Metz, "Quantifying the Workload of Subject Bibliographers in Collection Development," Journal of Academic Librarianship 17 (Nov. 1991): 284-87.
7. Sue O. Medina, 'The Evolution of Cooperative Collection Development in Alabama Academic Libraries," College & Research Libraries 53 (1992): 7-19.
8. Myoung Chung Wilson and Hendrik Edelman, "Collection Development in an Interdisciplinary Context," Journal of Academic Librarianship 22 (May 1996): 195-200.
9. Mary Biggs, "Sources of Tension and Conflict between Librarians and Faculty," Journal of Higher Education 52, no. 2 (1981): 182-201
10. David L. Vidor and Elizabeth Futas, "Effective Collection Developers: Librarians or Faculty?" LRTS 32, no. 2 (1988): 127-36. These researchers also cite four earlier studies, one on each side and two inconclusive.
11. Ibid., 135.
12. Donald E. Riggs, "Working with Faculty," College & Research Libraries 57 (1995): 49.
13. Ibid. The authors regret that the scope of this article does not permit exploring these other areas of faculty involvement, some of which are flourishing at their own institution. (Riggs also discusses faculty as motivators of library use, through both their own research and assignments.) Other articles examined the negative side of the same issue; a lament that teaching faculty do not require the use of library resources in their course is Robert K. Baker, "Working with Our Teaching Faculty," College &Research Libraries 56 (1995): 377-79.
14. Ibid. The authors regret that the scope of this article does not permit exploring these other areas of faculty involvement, some of which are flourishing at their own institution. (Riggs also discusses faculty as motivators of library use, through both their own research and assignments.) Other articles examined the negative side of the same issue; a lament that teaching faculty do not require the use of library resources in their course is Robert K. Baker, "Working with Our Teaching Faculty," College &Research Libraries 56 (1995): 377-79.
15. Charlene S. Hurt, Laura O. Rein, Maureen S. Connors, John C. Walsh, and Anna C. Wu, "Collection Development Strategies for a University Center Library" College &Research Libraries 56 (1995): 487-95.
16. Eveline L. Yang, "Psychology Collection Review: A Cooperative Project between Librarians and Departmental Faculty Members," Collection Management 13, no. 3 (1991): 43-55.
17. Ibid., 44.
18. Ed Buis, "Let's Make Sure We Are Not Part of the Problem: A Librarian's Lament," Collection Building 13, no. 1 (1993): 21-23.
19. Ibid., 21.
20. Connie Wu, Michael Bowman, Judy Gardner, Robert G. Sewell, and Myoung Chung Wilson, "Effective Liaison Relationships in an Academic Library," College & Research Libraries News 5 (1994): 254, 303.
21. Ibid., 303.
22. Mary Sellen, "Book Selection in the College Library: The Faculty Perspective," Collection Building 7 (1985): 4-10; Robert J. Dukes Jr., "Library/Faculty Relations in Acquisitions and Collection Development: The Faculty Perspective," Collection Development in the Eighties 7, no. 19 (1983): 221-24. (Seilen is a librarian, Dukes a professor of physics.)
23. Mary Sellen, "Book Selection in the College Library: The Faculty Perspective," Collection Building 7 (1985): 4-10; Robert J. Dukes Jr., "Library/Faculty Relations in Acquisitions and Collection Development: The Faculty Perspective," Collection Development in the Eighties 7, no. 19 (1983): 221-24. (Seilen is a librarian, Dukes a professor of physics.)
24. "RASD Guidelines for Liaison Work," RQ 32, no. 2 (1992): 198-204. Similar assumptions appear in Catherine E. Pasterczyk, "Checklist for the New Selector," College & Research Libraries News 7 (1988): 434-35.
25. "RASD Guidelines for Liaison Work," RQ 32, no. 2 (1992): 198-204. Similar assumptions appear in Catherine E. Pasterczyk, "Checklist for the New Selector," College & Research Libraries News 7 (1988): 434-35.
26. Ibid., 201.
27. Helen L. Gater, "The Price of Partnership," Journal of Library Administration 14, no. 2 (1991): 87-101; Rebecca C. Drummond, Anne Page Mosby, and Mary H. Munroe, "A Joint Venture: Collaboration in Collection Building," Collection Management 14, nos. 1-2 (1991): 59-72; Katina Strauch, "Librarian versus Faculty Selection: The Good Meets the Bad and the Ugly," Collection Development 12, nos. 1-2 (1990): 37-41.
28. Helen L. Gater, "The Price of Partnership," Journal of Library Administration 14, no. 2 (1991): 87-101; Rebecca C. Drummond, Anne Page Mosby, and Mary H. Munroe, "A Joint Venture: Collaboration in Collection Building," Collection Management 14, nos. 1-2 (1991): 59-72; Katina Strauch, "Librarian versus Faculty Selection: The Good Meets the Bad and the Ugly," Collection Development 12, nos. 1-2 (1990): 37-41.
29. Helen L. Gater, "The Price of Partnership," Journal of Library Administration 14, no. 2 (1991): 87-101; Rebecca C. Drummond, Anne Page Mosby, and Mary H. Munroe, "A Joint Venture: Collaboration in Collection Building," Collection Management 14, nos. 1-2 (1991): 59-72; Katina Strauch, "Librarian versus Faculty Selection: The Good Meets the Bad and the Ugly," Collection Development 12, nos. 1-2 (1990): 37-41.
30. Gater, "The Price of Partnership," 88-89.
31. Drummond, Mosby, and Munroe, "A Joint Venture," 64.
32. Strauch, "Librarian versus Faculty Selection," 39.
33. Mark Sandler, "Organizing Effective Faculty Participation in Collection Development," Collection Management 6, nos. 3-4 (1985): 63-72.
34. Marta A. Davis and M. Kathleen Cook, "Implementing a Library Liaison Program: Personnel, Budget, and Training," Collection Development 20, nos. 3-4 (1996): 157-65.
35. The authors agree with Amy E. Arnold, who demonstrated the improvement in faculty participation at Auburn University, Montgomery. See Amy E. Arnold, "Approval Slips and Faculty Participation in Book Selection at a Small University Library," Collection Management 18, nos. 1-2 (1993): 89-102.
36. The authors are grateful to Professors Christopher Starr, chair of the computer science department, and Walter Pharr, departmental liaison, for help with this section of the article. The authors appreciate the willingness of this overextended department to experiment with different approaches to book ordering.
37. Professor Nan Morrison, chair of the English department, reviewed the English section.
38. The authors wish to thank Professors Larry A. Carlson and Scott Peeples for their work on the American literature consensus, and Eddie Macy, graduate student in English, who ably assisted them.
39. Felix T. Chu, "Librarian-Faculty Relations in Collection Development," Journal of Academic Librarianship 23, no. 1 (1997): 15-20. Using resources and terminology from business as well as librarianship, Chu examined the "bond" between librarian and faculty member for resiliency, stiffness, strength, and repairability. He also stressed the need for continual assessment and the importance of supporting the curriculum.