N080.-630 ERIC REPORT RESUME ED 010 065 100666 24 (REV) RESEARCH ON LIBRARY SERVICES IN METROPOLITAN AREAS. BLASINGAME, RALPH NOV47159 RUTGERS, THE STATE UNIV. GRAD. SCH. OF LIB. SER., NEW BR5-.0076 CRP G -031 JUN-66 0E0.4 i0=-273 ERRS PRICE MFS0.09NC-41.24 31P. LIBRARIES,, *LIBRARY PROGRAMS, RESEARCH PROJECTS, *PUBLIC LIBRARIES, *SCHOOL LiBRARIES, LIBRARY INSTRUCTION, *LIBRARY SERVICES, *SEMINARS NEW BRUNSWICK, NEW JERSEY THIS IS THE FINAL REPORT OF THE SEMINAR TO STUDY THE PROBLEMS AFFECTING LIBRARY SERVICE IN METROPOLITAN AREAS_ LIBRARIANS, SOCIAL SCIENTISTS, EDUCATORS, AND AUTHORITIES IN RELATED FIELDS, FROM THE UNITED STATES AND CANADA, PARTICIPATED IN THE NINE 1 DAY SESSIONS. THE MUCH NEEDED AREAS OF RESEARCH WERE IDENTIFIED AS (1) INFORMATION NEED AND SUPPLY, (2) SOCIAL AND POLITICAL FACTORSs (3) EDUCATION AND TRAINING FOR WORK IN LIBRARIES, (4) LIBRARY OPERATIONS, AND (5) HISTORICAL STUDIES. (GC) WELFARE HEALTH,EDUCATION AND U. S.DSPARTMENT OF Office utEducation the exactly asreceived from has beenrci:reduced or opinions This document ord.natIng it.Po:nts of view orgalizat'on Education person or represent officialOffice of stated do notneccscarily position orpolicy. Resew Library Services 4etrolitsnAreas FINAL REPORT To the U. S. Office of Education Project No. 5-0076 Contract No. 0E-4-10-273 "Seminar to Study the Problems Affecting Library Service in Metropolitan Areas" Ralph Blasingames Director GRADUATE SCHOOL OF LIBRARY SERVICE Rutgers- The State University New Brunswick, N. J. 08903 Thr 1966 Final Report To the U. S.Office of Education Project No. 5-0076 Contract No. OE4-10-273 "Seminar to Studythe ProblemsAffecting Library Service in MetropolitanAreas" In the summer of 1964., the CooperativeResearch Program of the United StatesOffice of Educationt-g.sarded a contractto Rutgers - The State Universityto conducta seminar during 1964-65. The Graduate School of LibraryService and theUrban Studies Center jointly sponsored the applicationfor the contract.The objectives of this project were to (a) providereviews and summariesof topics in which research may beneeded, (b) identifythe areas ofgreatest need. for research in respect tometropolitan libraryservice, (c) gain some consensus as to theorder of importanceof the research topics, (d.) provide consultativeservices to authoritieswho might be able to rAirsue thestudies indicated,ttnd (e) assistin locating persons and agencieswith the researchcapacity required to pursue thestudies. It was originallyplanned that thisSeminar to Study the Problems AffectingLibrary Service inMetropolitan Areas would. consist of a five-day meeting towhich a selectgroup of twenty- fiveto thirty-five a librarians, socialscientists, andeducators concerned withmetropolitan areaproblems were tobe invited. Formal paperswere to be prepared inadvance by the participants. At a planning session attended by seven persons, including both librarians and social scientists, it was decided to approach the matter somewhat differently.It was felt that a series of small ow-day =structured meetings might be more effective than the "one-shot" conference which had been originally proposed. It was believed, that the advantages of the unstructured approach would be to Lzhieve personal and close involvement in library- centered research on the part of the social scientists and to convey ideas and attitudes from the other disciplines to the librarians.In this way, it was hoped that persons from both librarianship andthe socialsciences would regard the library as an interesting and attractive focus for research. A series of nine one-day sessions was scheduled.Invitations were mailed to a total of 127 librarians, social scientists, educators and authorities in related. fields who were chosen on such bases as interest in metropolitan area problems and in research. Of the 127 persons invited, in addition to the Director and Assistant Director, sixty-eight actually participated in sessions of the Seminar.Visitors traveled to New Snuawick, New Jersey, the place of the meetings, from fourteen states, the District of Columbia, and Canada. They represented all sections of the country. A complete list of Seminar participants may be found in an appendix to this report. - 2 In preparation for eachsession, the invited guestswere sent list of questionsthat might be considered,bibliographies, and other materialsthat might serve to stimulateactive discussim, of library problems.Each session was devoted.to whatever subjects relating to libraryservices in metropolitanareas the dozen or so participants elected todiscuss. About a half-dozen of the participants constituteda "core" group and were, with occasional exceptions present atall sessions. Me otherparticipants varied. from meetingto meeting.Twelve persons attended more than one session. Consultative services have,in addition, been provideto the Higher EducationCoordinating Council of St.Louis, which is contemplatinga study of information needsin the area.It is possible that thisservice might have been usedmore had the term of the project beenlonger. This document is thefinal report of the Seal=to Study the Problems AffectingLibrary Service in MetropolitanAreas. It is hoped that thereport will serve toencourage research into the :problemsfacing all types and sizesof libraries in metropolitan areas. The report representsa synthesis of the thoughts of the participants in the project.The Seminar would havebeen a failure were it not forthe fine cooperationgiven by all of the librar, socialscientists, and educators whoattended. We are indebted tothem all. -3 Special thanksare due Dr. Ralph W. Conant of the Joint Center for Urban Studiewof the Marsaclusetts Instituteof Technology and HarvardUniversity* who gave unstintinglyof his time andenergy so that this project might profitthoroughly from the experience hegained as Conference Coordinatorof the Symposium on LibraryFunctions in the Changing Metropolis*which was held in My, 1963; heserved as a member of thepermanent "core" group. The Graduate Schoolof Library Service and theUrban Studies Center at Rutgers= The State University are to be congratulated for the splendidsupport which they have giventhis project from its inception.Dean Neal Harlow and other LibrarySchool faculty have generouslyserved as participants in theSeminar. Mr. John E. Beboutend his staff have likewisegiven us invaluable assistance. Specialmention should be made ofDr. David Popenoe and Mra. VirginiaP. Whitney of the Urban StudiesCenter who served as membersof the permanentcore group; Mrs. Whitney settled throughoutas Seminar Reporters "Areas for Research,"which comprises the bulk of thisFinal Report, willappear as a chapter in a ouch A213.erpublication which is to be issuedseparately. Areas for Research These pages representan attempt to draw from records of the several discussionsessions held under this project theareas suggested for researchaffecting libraries and librarianship and to suggest some generalorder of priority.One of the objectives to be achieved throughthis project, as stated. in the approved. proposal, was to "...analyzethe areas of greatest needs for research in respect tometropolitan library service..." and to "...gain someconsensus as to the order of importance of the need..."Within each majorarea described, questions are posed which might becometopics for research if fully developedas research proposals.In this sense, this report also treats another of the aims of theproject "...to produce a specific list of research proposalsin some order of priority..." Early in the discussion sessions,it was decided that formulating and. describingresearch topics in detail was unwise in that any mature researchworker will wish to develop hisown approach and methods whenconfronted with a given set of cir- cumstances. This decisionwas influenced by the statements of several social scientists thatmetropolitan areas differ so much from each other thata research proposal prepared for one area might have little relevancefor another. Similarly, it was decided afterone or two discusiion - 5 - sessions that it wouldbe unwise to attempt to develop andpresent a list of research proposalsas "complete" or "exhaustive." The following reasons provide thebasis for this decision:First, no list of specific questionsor projects can possibly be comraete, since all aspects ofa general topic cannot be imagined atany given. time. Secondl the exhaustive-list approachcannot take into account Arture changes inconditions and would. thus shortly be out of date.Third, it would be impossible to envisionall combinations of thesequestions which might be stated.Fourth, making such a list ignoresthe effect which research results have upon the formulationof ftture questions. For these reasons, thecomprehenaive-list approach is be- lieved. to be limiting,whereas the purpose of the discussions and of this report is toexpand the research possibilities for the future. These reasons are set forthin some detail partly because there was disclosed duringthe sessions an important difference of opinion between socialscientists and practicing librarians concerning what constitutesresearch and how a field of endeavor may best be advanced through research.In part, this difference of outlook may springfrom the background of the %utgersSeminar." Though the project,as actually fundedl concerned research,it had its genesis ina proposal for a series of studies, structured so as to provide information useful in theadministration of ;Olio libraries in metropolitanareas.Thus, some librarians -6- expected to have