Efforts to Increase Use of Existing Resources, and Coordination Of
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
DOCUMENT RESUME LI 000 598 ED 022 493 By-Holley, Edward G.; Hendricks,Donald D. RESOURCES OF TEXAF LIBRARIES. Texas State Library, Austin.Field Services Div. Texas Coll. and Univ. System,Austin. Coordinating Board.; Pub Date 68 Note- 364p. of Houston, Houston, Texas77004 (Free) Available from-Edward G. Holley,Director of Libraries, University EDRS Price MF 41.50 HC -$14.64 EVALUATION, LAW LIBRARIES,LIBRARY COLLECTIONS,LIBRARY_ Descriptors-*COLLEGE LIBRARIES, SURVEYS, LIBRARYTECI-NICAL COOPERATION, LIBRARY FACILITIES,LIBRARY SERVICES, *LIBRARY LIBRARIES, *UNIVERSITYLIBRARIES PROCESSES, MEDICAL LIBRARIES,*PUBLIC LIBRARIES, *SPECIAL IdenNfiers- Texas, University ofTexas at Austin Library for This study of library resources wasundertaken as a partof a statewide plan The document includesdescriptions of libraryfacilities and higher education in Texas. public and resources atthe University ofTexas at Austin, otheruniversities, and colleges. The publiclibrary network, health sciencelibraries, private lunior and senior also described. law libraries, speciallibraries, and emergingcooperative patterns are include improvedbibliographic access tothe University The report's recommendations Texas State Library, of Texas at AustinLibrary collections, astrengthening of the efforts to increase useof existing resources,and coordinationof cooperative list of areas of strength inTexas libraries programs. A60-page alphabetical subiect and 257 basic has been compiledand ir cluded. Lists of100 basic pariodicals check holdingsinthe various libraries appearin the reference books used to colleges and appendixes along with 2 mapsshowing locations ofpublic and private universities in Texas.(CC) RESOURCES OF TEXAS LIBRARIES By Edward G. Holley and Donald D. Hendricks U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION & WELFARE OFFICE OF EDUCATION THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN REPRODUCED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED FROM THE PERSON OR ORGANIZATION ORIGINATING IT.POINTS OF VIEW OR OPINIONS STATED DO NOT NECESSARILY REPRESENT OFFICIAL OFFICE OF EDUCATION POSITION OR POLICY. TEXAS STATE LIBRARY FIELD SERVICES DIVISION AUSTIN, TEXAS 1968 RESOURCES OF TEXAS LIBRftr4TES By Edward G. Holley Director of Libraries University of Houston and Donald D. Hendricks Director of Libraries Sam Houston State College with the assistance of David A. Kronick Librarian South Texas Medical School at San Antonio Marie Harvin Research Librarian M.D. Anderson Hospital and Tumor Institute University of Texas Alfred J. Coco Law Librarian University of Houston Houston, Texas 1968 FOR ROBERT BINGHAM DOWNS DEAN OF LIBRARY SURVEYORS FRIEND AND MENTOR OF THE AUTHORS Introduction This study originated in response to a request from the Coordinating Board, Texas College and University System, thlt the library resources of the state be studied as a part of the new master plan for higher education in Texas. The Board provided an initial grant to finance the necessary travel of the investigators and later supplemented this amount so that a more complete picture of the health science libraries could be added. The aim of the study has been not only to identify weaknesses as they affect the picture of the libraries iv' the state's twenty-two colleges and uni- versities but also to identify subject strengths in all kinds of libraries as they relate to the academic scene. The grant was made in December, 1966, to the University of Houston which released its director of libraries from part of his duties for the project. He has been aided in this project by the director of libraries of Sam Houston State College whose institution made time available for his assistance as co-investigator. Early in the project the state college librarians and the librarians of Rice, S.M.U., Baylor, Trinity, and T.C.U. met in Houston to discuss with Dr. Robert B. Downs, Dean of Library Administration of the University of Illinois, the direction in which the study might proceed. Dr. Downs is the dean of American library resources surveyors and his recent Resources of North Carolina Libraries and Resources of Missouri Libraries have served as models for this study. We are happy to acknowledge here our very considerable indebtedness to Dean Downs for his suggestions and recommendations at the outset of the study. A series of five questionnaires weresent to each of the 109academic libraries in the state. Replies were received from 84 institutions. Then the investigators visited each ofthe twenty-two state collegesand uni- versities, the major privateuniversities, many of the private senior colleges, and a number of the juniorcolleges. They talked with librarians, faculty members, presidents, deans,and, occasionally, students, Great quantities of data have been assembled,only a part of which is presented here. That there are still gaps will beimmediately apparent, but we believe that this study of Texaslibrary resources can be the beginning step toward the improvement of libraryservices at all levels. Not the least of our achievement will be anincreased appreciation for the resourcesand services already available to thestudent and researcher in Texas. Two chapters, those on thehealth sciences and law, have beenwritten by professional colleagues. Dr. David A. Kronick, Librarianof the South Texas Medical School at SanAntonio, and Miss Marie Harvin, ResearchMedical Librarian of the M. D. AndersonHospital and Tumor Institute, areresponsible for the detailed study of thehealth sciences libraries in ChapterVI. Professor Alfred J. Coco, Law Librarianof the University of Houston,assumed responsibility for Texas law libraries,Chapter VII. Finally, we owe a considerable debt to theField Services Division of the Texas State Library, ready asalways to encourage eveny good work,for agreeing to publish the work in its finalform. We also owe much to Coordinating Board staff members, Jack K. Williams,Jack Cross, Kenneth Ashworthand Ray professional Fowler. On many occasions we have had reason tobe grateful to our colleagues. No doubt our repeated requests foradditional information sorely tried their patience. However, for the interpretation of the data, the analysis and recommendations, we assumefull responsibility. Edward G. Holley Director of Libraries Univeristy of Houston Donald D. Hendricks Director of Libraries Sam Houston State College Contents I. The University of Texas at Austin--The State'sMajor Library Resource 1 II. Texas' Other Universities 18 III. The Public and Private Senior College Libraries 70 IV. Junior Colleges 114 V. Public Library Networks 131 VI. Health Science Libraries 157 VII. Law Libraries 188 VIII. Special Libraries 240 IX. Emerging Cooperative Patterns 258 X. Recommendations 271 XI. Subject Strength in Texas Libraries 274 Appendix A. Basic Periodicals 335 Appendix B. Basic Reference Books 340 Appendix C. Location of Public Colleges and Universities 351 Appendix D. Location of Private Colleges and Universities 352 Chapter I The University of Texas at Austin--The State's Major Library Resource Any discussion of library resources in Texas must begin with the University of Texas at Austin. It is unquestionably the leading library not only in the state of Texas but also in the region of which it is a part. Indeed, there are many who say, with much .:!st'fication, that it is the most significant collection of library materials between Chapel Hill-Durham, North Carolina, and Los Angeles, California, and south of Champaign-Urbana, Illinois. In the latest list of the most prestigious academic libraries in the country, those belonging to the Association of Research Libraries, che University of Texas at Austin ranked 17th in holdings. As of August 31, 1966, the fully cataloged and processed items amounted to 1,838,645, and during 1965/66 the University added 115,836 volumes to its collections. Table I shows the standing of the University of Texas at Austin among the other academic research lih-aries of the country in terms of holdings and additions iser year, and expenditures for books, periodicals, and binding. Not included in these figures are 7,280,751 manuscripts in original form, 58,363 manuscripts in pho'-nraphic copies, 1,424,638 pages of transcriptions of mahuscripts, 49,485 pages of manuscript translations, and 1,988 reels of microfilmed manuscriptb. Oral archives amounted to 563 reels while there are 105,880 maps, 11,120 music:al scores, 8,002 pictures, 3,283 sound recordings, and 439 items in the Texas authors' file. 2 Table I ASSOCIATION OF RESEARCH LIBRARIES 1965-1966 Academic Library Statistics Volumes in Cross Expenditures Total Library volumes for books, library added periodicals, operating 1965-66 and binding expenditures 1. Harvard Univ. /,600,357 208,534 $1,596,989 $6,728,455 2. Yale Univ. 5,004,301 178,937 1,420,206 4,353,112 3. Univ. Illinois 4,083,634 197,190 1,744,763 4,454,756 4. Columbia Univ. 3,675,920 121,894 927,875 3,347,542 5. Univ. Michigan 3,516,355 142,859 1,066,365 3,949,783 6. Univ. California B. 3,179,633 155,175 1,382,883 4,672,388 7. Cornell Univ. 2,892,539 171,012 1,149,001 3,686,998 8. Stanford Univ. 2,627,095 177,684 1,074 801 3,349,394 9. Univ. Chicago 2,504,250 122,560 904,012 2,555,730 10. Uni4) M1,7-esota 2,480,097 109,758 866,345 2,534,362 11. Univ. Toronte 2,344,797 217,959 1,348,938 3,911,496 12. Univ. California LA. 2,333,442 142,002 1,428,584 4,295,751 13. Princeton Univ. 2,097,737 106,390 671,953 1,786,221 14. Univ. Pennsylvania 1,958,602 72,954 655,402 1,960,744 15. Indiana Univ. 1,943,256 no rep. 1,116,335 2,724,047 16. Ohio State Univ. 1,845,069 99,926 622,734 2,443,921 17. Univ. Texas 1,838,645 115,836 1,065,798 2,165,491 3 1,553,140 18. Duke Univ. 1,783,803 71,706 611,870 r9,006 1,569,156 19. Northwestern Univ. 1,771,899 65,605 2,592,790 20. Univ. Wisconsin 1,744,321 108,647 1,107,503 465,790 1,145,956 21, Univ.