ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN PRODUCTION NOTE University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Library Large-scale Digitization Project, 2007. Library Trends / VOLUME 13 NUMBER 1 JULY, 1964 Research Methods in Librarianship GUY GARRISON Issue Editor CONTRlBUTORS TO THIS ISSUE GUY GARRISON 3 Introduction ROBERT B. DOWNS . 6 Resources For Research in Librarianship MAURICE F. TAUBER 15 Survey Method in Approaching Library Problems FELIX REICHMA" . 31 Historical Research and Library Science THELMA EATON . 42 Bibliographical Research DAVIDR.KRATHWOHL . 54 Experimental Design in Educational Research GERALDR. SMITH . 68 Inadequacies in Research Proposals PATRICIA KNAPP . 84 The Methodology and Results of the Monteith Pilot Project MARY VIRGINIA GAVER . 103 Research on Effectiveness of Elementary School Libraries FRANKL. SCHICIC . 117 The Coordinated Collection and Individual Use of Library Statistics LEON CARNOVSKY . 126 Publishing the Results of Research in Librarianship J. H. SHERA . 141 Darwin, Bacon, and Researoh in Librarianship This Page Intentionally Left Blank Introduction GUY GARRISON THEPAPERS PRESEXTED in this issue of Library Trends, with the exception of the final one, were originally prepared for the Conference on Research Methods in Librarianship sponsored by the Library Research Center, Graduate School of Library Science, with the cooperation of the Division of University Extension, and held at Allerton House, the University of Illinois conference center near Monticello, Illinois, on September 8-11, 1963. The papers were sched- uled to be issued as a separate monograph until the publications board of Library Trends expressed interest in using them as the basis for an issue of this journal, thereby assuring at once a wider distribution and a more permanent format than conference papers ordinarily achieve. Since these papers were prepared for use at a conference, this issue of Library Trends departs somewhat from its usual practice of pub- lishing commissioned articles gathered by an invited advisory editor. Despite this fact, the papers do meet at least partially the Library Trends’ editorial requirements for “evaluative recapitulation of cur- rent thought and practice” on a special topic. The topic, moreover, is one which has been badly neglected in library literature in recent years. The papers are published here in substantially the same form as they were given at the conference. Some of the papers have been cut by the editor to avoid repetition of material in two or more papers and to eliminate purely topical references to the conference. In addi- tion, several papers were modified in certain details by the authors to benefit from ideas or suggestions that arose during discussions at conference sessions. One of the talks from the conference, given in- formally by Dr. Kern Dickman, Assistant Director of the Statistical Service Unit, University of Illinois, is not included here. Mr. Dickman Guy Garrison is Research Associate Professor and Director, Library Research Center, Graduate School of Library Science, University of Illinois. r31 GUY GARRISON spoke about the work of the Statistical Service Unit and the Digital Computer Laboratory of the University and about some of the im- plications of facilities of this type for research in the social sciences. The paper by Jesse Shera, which was especially written for this issue, serves to round out the collection of articles on methodology by pro- viding some definitions, a necessary step which many conference participants thought was slighted in the conference papers and in the discussions that followed them. This Conference on Research Methods in Librarianship was the first such meeting to be sponsored by the Graduate School of Li- brary Science, and perhaps by any library school. The paucity of published literature on the applications of research methods to li- brary problems has been a matter of concern to all who are interested in research, and especially to those who teach research methods and related courses in library schools. While the amount of time and money devoted to research in librarianship has increased substan- tially in recent years, the fact remains that the library profession has not yet faced up to the necessity for equipping itself with the full range of skills and techniques appropriate for carrying on competent research. The effort, a few years ago, of the Committee on Research of the Association of American Library Schools to stimulate a coordi- nated program of research in the major library schools did not suc- ceed. This Committee was, however, responsible for the October 1957, issue of Library Trends devoted to research, which provided a useful group of articles summarizing the current state of research on various aspects of librarianship. While summaries of research and articles about the need for research are commonplace in library litera- ture, the actual research studies which appear all are too often rou- tine, superficial, and questionable in methodology. The conference last September, in addition to furnishing an over- view of current practices in library research, served also to call atten- tion to the need for establishing some continuing, if informal, means of fostering better communication among research-minded librarians. Research deserves to be recognized as a distinct specialty within li- brarianship and its practitioners should have some outlet for discus- sion, criticism, and shared experience. While the Allerton House con- ference did not take any action or make any recommendations on this matter, it did show that there are many librarians concerned with research who would welcome the chance to affiliate with a group or organization identified with research in librarianship. Publication of Introduction these papers in Library Trends will perhaps serve to make an even wider audience aware of this need. In attendance at the conference were eighty persons, including twenty-seven faculty members representing eighteen different library schools. There was substantial representation also from federal and state library agencies, college and university libraries, public libraries, and professional organizations. Since a topic as narrow as research methodology would appear to have limited interest, the size of the registration was encouraging. Out of this first conference came many suggestions of other aspects of the research process that could profit- ably be explored at future meetings, and a second conference on a related topic is being planned for 1965, The conference chairman, who also served as advisory editor of this issue of Library Trends, wishes to thank the Publications Board for making possible the appearance of the conference papers in this form. A great debt is owed to the speakers who prepared and de- livered papers at the conference and are at last seeing them in print. These people were chosen to speak at the conference because of their knowledge of various kinds of library research and for their ability to match theory with practical experience in discussing research tech- niques. Within the limits of a single three-day conference it was not possible to represent all types of libraries, all methodologies, or all aspects of the research process. While these published papers do not furnish the complete manual of research methods in librarianship which is badly needed, they do serve to indicate something of the scope and variety of research methods that can be applied to library problems. They also indicate clearly that library research method- ology has a long way to go before it meets the standards that are routinely expected in other disciplines. Resources For Research .in Librarianship ROBERT B. DOWNS ANY DISCUSSION OF RESEARCH methodology in librarianship or anything else should begin, as Socrates constantly reiterated twenty-four hundred years ago, with definitions of terms. Broadly interpreted, the word librarianship encompasses an immense variety of activities and interests. The ancient concept of librarians as mere custodians of books has become largely pass6 in our generation. Modern members of the breed range from generalists, who know something about practically everything, to specialists on the most minute matters. It would be fair to state, in fact, that there is room in our profession for anyone concerned with intellectual affairs-and perhaps for some who are not. Under the vast rubric of librarianship, we have blanketed the book- mobile operator in New Mexico, the research librarian at DuPont and General Motors, the expert on children’s literature in the Chicago Public Library, the Air Force librarian at Chanute Field, the Urbana High School librarian, the Director of the Harvard University Library, the Librarian of Congress, the rare book specialist in the J. Pierpont Morgan Library, and so on and on, ad infinituni. All these and many more play key roles in the great, complex American library system, performing a range of services which the rest of the world is striving to emulate. An illustration of the diversity of interests represented in librarian- ship is offered by the area which has occupied a good share of my professional attention over, the past thirty years, that is, general re- sources for research. Investigations of library resources have taken me into studies of various phases of inter-library cooperation, union cata- logs, union lists, bibliographical centers, storage centers for little-used books, specialization of fields, microreproduction projects, regional planning,