Library Acquisitions: Practice and Theory. Vol. IO, pp. 3- 7. 1986 0364-6408 / 86 $03.00+.00

Printed in the USA. All rights reserved. Copyright @ 1986 Pergamon Press Ltd

LAPT AT TEN

BARBARA WALDEN

History Bibliographer

University of Minnesota Libraries

Minneapolis, MN 55455

ABSTRACT-T?ris article attempts to summarize and evaluate the first nine volumes of Library Acquisitions: Practice and Theory. Three stages of its develop- ment are noted:first, a period of eclectic subject matter and unevenness in selection, second, a period emphasizing a more structured social-scientific approach and, most recently, an outlook which stresses practical and generalizable aspects of common problems. This latter approach seems to be the most appropriate and effective, though possible drawbacks are noted.

Can a library professional-cum-scholarly journal which publishes diagrams of booktrucks [I] and articles about stack-moving dollies [2] and has the editorial temerity to suggest that a highly-touted ALA preconference was an “an opportunity squandered [3]” survive and find a niche in the overcrowded world of library literature? Evidently so, for Library Acquisitions: Practice and Theory has reached its tenth volume.

LAPTwas born in 1977 with the intention of “filling the void and bridging the gap.” It was to be neither a journal specializing in one aspect of library acquisitions, nor so general as to submerge acquisitions in a larger selection of subjects. Further, the emphasis was to be on the practical aspects of its subject, though the theoretical would be included also [4]. Its first years were not easy. One critic of the first issue suggested that it was “an embarrassment to both the library and publishing professions,” containing “pieces of no substance or interest [5].” Other critics suggested that a more carefully targeted approach to the art and practice of acquisitions was needed, including such topics as “developments in publishing and marketing, financial control. . . , vendor evaluation. . . [6], bibliographic databases, the role of the bibliographer or subject specialist [7]” and several other topics. Survey and theoretical articles seemed especially lacking. In short, although most reviewers agreed that the need for a journal such as LA PT was apparent, quality and subject matter were early concerns. This article will attempt to summarize and evaluate the first nine volumes of LA PTin order to see where it has been and where it might be going.

Without a doubt, the early issues of LA PTconcentrated upon the practical. Yet, rereading the articles published after the dubious first issue is refreshing. While the reviewers’ comments about

3

4 BARBARA WALDEN

unevenness of quality and selection still seem germane, as evidenced by the article on mail-room sorting [8], some articles nevertheless have something to say to the reader after a passage of years, and others can serve to remind us that certain subjects have a continuing life of their own. For example, three articles discussing approval plans appeared in LA Pi? first year, as well as two on resource sharing and collection development. Also appearing in the first volume were two articles which have withstood the test of time quite well; Frederick Lynden’s on “Sources of Information on the Costs of Library Materials” and Robert Broadus’ survey of methods for evaluation of library collections. Both of these are still read and quoted and have provided the groundwork for subsequent studies.

Several ongoing features began in volume one and still continue. A series of articles intended to stimulate reaction, the “Acquisitions Roundtable,” began with Kenneth Jensen’s treatment of a subject which continues to concern library administrators, the organization and structure of collection development. The first year also marked the beginning of the very practical matter of reporting on meetings and conferences for the many readers who had been unable to attend. Commencing as a simple report from an ALA-Midwinter RTSD meeting, this reportage and publication of conference presentations has gradually come to have a large share of each issue. An editorial introduced volume one, and continued to appear at the beginning of most issues through volume eight.

Other ongoing features in LA PT were introduced later. Book reviews became a regular feature beginning in volume five, and provide lengthy critical assessments of major publications in acquisitions and collection development. An “Annual Buying Guide” was begun in volume five also, but was discontinued after volume seven. Since it included, for the most part, information readily available in other journals or standard reference sources, the decision to drop it seems prudent. A “Software Survey” questionnaire began to appear at the end of volume eight, number three; this feature will prove quite useful if it develops into an ongoing feature reporting on new acquisitions software development.

Early volumes of LAPT contained an eclectic mix of the practical and provocative with the mundane and routine. Perhaps two articles from volume two may serve as examples of the “provocative.” Depending upon one’s point of view, Brian Alley and Jennifer Cargill’s article on measures developed to cope with selecting from and processing a mammoth purchase of unsorted out-of-print books is either a cautionary tale of how one library was forced to come to terms with a gigantic white elephant, or a simple description of microfilming and inventory techniques for unsorted collections [9]. The reader is left wondering what underlying assumptions of collection development led the library to purchase these books. As recorded in the article, a practical test of these assumptions seemed to suggest that they were faulty, for the collection, after consuming a large amount of time and effort, appeared ultimately to be of little use to the library which purchased it.

Likewise, Helen Rippier Wheeler’s article “We Can’t Put Women in Our Regular Budget! A Status Report on Distribution of the Women’s History Research Center Library on Micro- film[lO]” reads on the surface like an angry diatribe against foolish librarians who have not rushed to purchase the publications of the Women’s History Research Center. But beneath the surface lies an enduring issue; the role of libraries in providing the resources for change-often on a very limited budget-and the place of the professional librarian in the process of change. Perhaps the practical manifestations of this issue have moved to other fields, such as peace and disarmament, and maybe the theoretical debate is no longer as heated, but this issue is still here and will be as long as the recorded word stirs thought and controversy.

This reader wished that, both in these instances and elsewhere in LAPT, the “theoretical” concerns that seem to lie unspoken and assumed under some of the supposedly “practical” articles

LAPTat Ten 5

had been more clearly exposed. Often, this interrelationship of the theoretical and practical is what makes librarianship interesting, as well as differentiating it from the work of the technician. Further, it is at this intersection of theory with the practical demands of the real world that genuine advanca in librarianship often take place.

Of course, it is not always possible for the same person to combine both the practical and the theoretical. The library staff members who had to cope with the large undifferentiated collection were in all probability not the ones who decided to purchase it in the first place. The person who is passionate about a cause is not likely to care about the more general issues raised in attempting to fold previously unavailable or “marginal” resources in ever-expanding numbers into already inadequate materials budgets. Yet it is just these concerns which test theoretical assumptions about collection development and acquisitions in “real” actuality. LA Pi’3 attempt to provide a forum for simultaneous exposure to both aspects has the potential to be one of its most valuable features. Through several articles which describe a specific case or problem, combined with response or rebuttal, theoretical assumptions and practical realities could be brought to bear on one another, shedding light on both. The increasing coverage of theme-oriented conferences and workshops in LA PT provides one way in which this kind of give-and-take can be captured. The “Acquisitions Roundtable” feature is another-except that, as isolated articles, these features may provoke some letters to the editor (a regular feature notably lacking in LAP73 first nine volumes) but not the lengthier and reasoned interactions which can be provided by a series of articles on a similar topic, carefully planned and, perhaps, requested or commissioned from authors known to have divergent viewpoints, and appearing together in the same volume. An example of an “Acquisitions Roundtable” which succeeded in bringing together most of the diverse elements of a controversial subject appeared in LAPT in 1981 as “The Moral Majority, Our Bodies, Ourselves and Libraries.” In a series of articles which focused upon the controversy besetting one work, some of the conflicts surrounding one aspect of the current censorship controversy were exposed in a way which allowed the reader to reflect upon the considered viewpoint of both sides.

As LAPT matured, it did not lose its eclectic nature, though it began to look increasingly like other, more formal products of library “science” as footnotes, tables, and social-scientific discourse appeared more frequently in its pages. Undocumented, provocative articles tended to disappear, or to appear only as editorials, while articles dealt in increasing detail with such supposedly quantifiable aspects of librarianship as library use [ 11 J (“Report of the Kent Study. . . “) formulas for allocating materials budgets [ 123 and citation analysis. This change may also reflect the flood of problems and rapid change in the late 1970s and early 1980s which made librarians seek out more readily accessible solutions to library dilemmas such as automation and lack of space, while problems appearing less amenable to rational manipulation of data elements tended to be relegated to the background.

However, received ideas, facile assumptions, and intolerable situations still need to be questioned; some good polemics are still needed to balance the careful gray prose of library “science.” One recent article provides a basis for hope that polemical writing in the library field can be merged with meticulous study. This is Charles Hamaker and Deana Astle’s carefully researched “Recent Pricing Patterns in British Journal Publishing” [ 133. Found here are both a call to action and the carefully generalized evidence which supports such action. It is to be hoped that LAPT can continue to produce such effective polemics in scholarly trappings.

One element that recurs steadily throughout early issues of LAPT is the “mundane.” The “Acquisitions Hardware” section began in volume one, number two, and although its early manifestations were rightly disparaged by critics, later versions of this column were valuable. For example, an adapted version of the home-made, inexpensive and low-tech booktruck for moving library collections, described and diagrammed in the “Acquisitions Hardware” column in volume

6 BARBARA WALDEN

three of LAPT, rumbles through the halls of my library today as collections are shifted. Librarians too often overlook the real service they can do one another by sharing via the printed word the practical, inexpensive solutions they have developed for common problems. This reader, at least, thinks it unfortunate that so few creative individuals have contributed to this section of LAPT; both the booktruck and the practical stack moving dolly described in volume six are the work of one individual. Another useful contribution, though more quickly outdated since it dealt with “high” technology, concerned the creation of a practical online acquisitions system from the interface of two non-acquisitions pieces of hardware [14]. After volume six, no more “Acquisitions Hardware” sections have appeared. Surely there are more good ideas and practical solutions out there. Speak up!

Over the years, LAPT continued to change, no doubt partly in response to suggestions by its readers. Recent issues seem to indicate a more conscious effort to provide in-depth coverage of specific subjects or problems. They have also tended to focus more carefully on major aspects of library acquisitions which can be generalized to a variety of situations. For example, the special issue on “Acquisitions from the Third World” (volume six, number two) provides a helpful introduction, overview, and specific sources of aid in dealing with a complex subject. Three lengthy articles on selecting an approval plan vendor span volumes seven, eight and nine [IS], offering a specific, step-by-step approach to approval plan selection along with comparative data on specific vendors. In this relentlessly practical and highly useful study, underlying assumptions about the role of approval plans receive no consideration but the very real problems attendant upon vendor selection are dealt with clearly and straightforwardly, even to the extent of naming names and making explicit comparisons among vendors. In many respects, these articles represent the “practical” side of LA PT at its best.

It appears that LAPThas survived because it filled a real need for a forum in which to deal with the practical matters which make up so much of a librarian’s work. In the process, however, the cranky opinion piece has all but disappeared. For the most part, only the editorials survived of the early blend which produced, along with articles best excluded, some irritating, sometimes wrong- headed, but thought-provoking diatribes. In their place have come an ever-increasing number of conference and workshop papers and reports. This feature seems to be well-received and does indeed provide a real service both for those unable to attend these meetings and as a record of discussions which might otherwise go unrecorded. Some of these conference publications are excellent. For example, volume 9, number I is devoted almost exclusively to a highly informative conference at the College of Charleston on issues in book and serial acquisitions. Volume 9, numbers two and three provide shorter reports both from ALA and a wideranging sample of other conferences, including a “scientific” explanation, with diagrams, of the process of paper deterioration [ 163. But conference and workshop presentations, while they are often informative about new ideas and methods, can also be broadly platitudinous and sometimes simply digest the current, accepted state of things for a passive audience. Sometimes when presented serially they can be redundant, too, as similar issues are discussed throughout the country in regionally based institutes and workshops. Thus, although conference proceedings can be useful, a too heavy emphasis on information transmitted in this mode may have its pitfalls also.

To sum up, then, LAPTseems to have come of age, to have entrenched itself upon the library scene, and to have found its voice. Further, it is a voice which resonates. Doubters need only turn to the Journal Citation Reports portion of the Social Science Citation Index for 1983 [17] to discover that, among journals ranked by “impact factor,” the measure which takes into account publication frequency and other factors which may affect citation frequency, in the “Information Science and Library Science” category LA PT came in twelfth in a field of fixty-six. While it was well behind such information-science giants as ASIS Journal, it was ahead of such traditional library stalwarts as RQ and Library Trends.

LA PT at Ten 7

As it has reached middle age, LA PT has become informative, practical, useful and accepted. Now it may also be in danger of becoming stodgy and dull. Approval plans, collection evaluation, automation, publisher and bookseller relations, are issues which promise to be with us for a long time to come. But so will censorship, misunderstanding, foolish notions, visionary ideas, passionate causes, useful inventions, and resistance to change, in library acquisitions as in other fields, and these have their “practical” manifestations also. Some of LAPT’s most engaging articles have dealt with these latter, however imperfectly.

LAPT is clearly no longer a journal of “no substance or interest.” It has both substance and interest though it is, regrettably, rather less yeasty than it used to be. Marcia Pankake’s imaginative allegory of cooperative collection development [ 18) rescues volume nine from being merely informative and useful. For the next ten volumes this reader looks forward to more imaginative writing, and to some strong opinions joining, or disagreeing with, those of the editor, as well as to a continuation of practical, informative writing, as people involved in the acquisitions field continue to attempt to deal with the difficult areas where the theoretical and the practical intersect, and sometimes clash.

I.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

IO.

II.

12.

13.

14.

IS.

16.

17.

18.

NOTES AND REFERENCES

Alley, Brian. “A Utility Book Truck Designed for Moving Library Collections.” Library Acquisitions: Practice and

Theory, 3 ( 1979): 33-37.

Alley, Brian. “Moving Steel Stacks with a Special Dolly,” Library Acquisitions: Pracrice and Theory. 6 (1982):

253-257.

Bullard, Scott R. “Automated Acquisitions: What Was Good? What Was Bad? What Was Missing?” Librar.1

Acquisitions: Practice and Theory. 2 (1978): 67-68.

Bullard, Scott R. “LA PT: Bridging the Gap and Filling the Void,” Library Acquisitions: Practice and Theory. I

(1977): I-2.

De Gennaro, Richard. Library Journal, 102 (July, 1977): I47 I.

Thompson, Jim. Serials Review, 3 (Oct.-Dec. 1977): 48.

Michalak, Jo-Ann. Serials Review. 5 (1979): 24.

Vernon, J.R. “Mail Room Sorting,” Library Acquisitions: Pracrice and ‘Theory, I (1977): 89-92.

Alley, Brian and Jennifer Cargill. “Inventory and Selection Techniques for Large Unorganized Collections.” Library

Acquisitions: Practice and Theory. 2 (1978): 23-28.

Wheeler, Helen Rippier. “We Can’t Put Women in Our Regular Budget! A Status Report,” Library Acquisitions:

Pracdce and Theory, 2 (1978): 133-l 39.

Borkowski. Casimir and Murdo J. MacLeod. “Report on the Kent Study of Library Use: A University of Pittsburgh

Reply,” Library Acquisitions: Practice and Theory, 3 ( 1979): 125-l 5 I.

Yunker, James A. and Carol G. Covey. “An Optimizing Approach to the Problem of Interdepartmental Allocation

of the Library Materials Budget,” Library Acquisitions: Practice and Theory, 4 ( 1980): 199-223.

Hamaker, Charles and Deana Astle. “Recent Pricing Patterns in British Journal Publishing,” Library Acquisitions:

Pracrire and Theory, 8 (1984): 225-232.

Leighty, Virginia and Neal D. Nixon. “Interfacing OCLC and Dataphase for an Automated Acquisitions System.”

Library Acquisitions: Practice and Theory. 6 ( 1982): 259-263.

Reidelbach, John H. and Gary M. Shirk. "Selecting an Approval Plan Vendor,” Library Arquisitions: Practice and

77reor.r,7(1983): ll5-122;8(1984): 157-202;9(1985): 177-260.

Bullard, Scott R. “Acid Decisions and Other Highlights of the 1984 Meetings of the American Association for State

and Local History,” Library Acquisitions: Pracrice and Theory, 9 (1985): 147-162.

Garfield, Eugene, ed. “Journal Ranking Package Ranked by Impact Factor,” SSCl Journal Citarion Reports. 7

(1983): 135.

Pankake. Marcia. “Coordinated Collection Development: The Librarian’s Progress from This World to That Which

is to Come,” Library Acquisitions: Practice and Theory, 9 ( 1985): 93-98.