ACRL News Issue (B) of College & Research Libraries July/August 1989 / 579 ployers of TSTI graduates. The library solicits the information from each program and tries to update it each year by contacting the various programs for the information. It is helpful in letting students see where former graduates of their technology pro­ gram are now working. The list varies in quality and is mainly dependent on the effort of each pro­ gram to supply the information to us. Of course, the student can also gain this information from his or her program, but it has proved convenient to have this compilation at the library also. Overall, I think the presentation to the Laser Club w ent very well. I could tell they were grateful someone took the time to talk to them because so m any of them asked questions and commented on how they really appreciated my time. I’m looking forward to giving this type of presentation more of­ ten. Students or faculty do not usually request such a service, but it is obviously needed. The success and extent of this service rests with the librarian. I feel it is worthwhile because after all, when we give library instruction classes one of our goals is for the student to view th e lib ra ry as a n inform ation place—not just a study hall during their years of college, but as a resource place anytime, now and in the future. And w hat better way to solidify this concept than helping them pursue a career? Life­ long learning exemplified! ■ ■ S c i e n c e c o l l e c t i o n s in c o m m u n i t y c o l l e g e lib r a r ie s By Kate Bradley Acquisitions Librarian Bellevue C om m unity College, Washington Using the conspectus to assess curriculum support. A s a community college library in the Pacific Northwest we had an opportunity to participate in the L ibrary and Inform ation Resources for the Northwest (LIRN) regional assessment project. Be­ cause of staff turnover at the time, Bellevue Com­ m unity College did not become involved in the ini­ tia l stages of LIRN . E arly reports from other community college libraries performing the LIRN assessment did not encourage belated participa­ tion. For community colleges the m ain advantage of doing the assessment was th a t librarians gained hands-on familiarity with their collections, becom­ ing aware in m any instances th a t major portions of the library were badly outdated, requiring exten­ sive weeding and replacement. The deficiency of the LIRN project has to do with the nature of com­ m unity colleges in Washington state and the rela­ tionship of the libraries to the colleges. As education costs rise and acceptance into the state universities becomes increasingly competi­ tive, the function of community colleges has gradu­ ally shifted from two-year vocational/technical training to undergraduate preparation for transfer to four-year institutions. In the spring of 1988, “among bachelor’s degree recipients at public re­ gional institutions, about 48 % were students who transferred credits from a Washington community 580 / C&RL News college.”1 W hile m any individual, institutionally complete programs still do exist at the com m unity colleges, the colleges increasingly resemble each o th e r in o fferin g u n d e rg r a d u a te re q u ire m e n t courses in sciences, hum anities, social sciences and business.2 Since the mission of the com m unity college li­ braries is to support the curriculum , logically the collections will resemble each other in providing concentrations of m aterials w hich LIRN rates “2A, Basic Level” and “3A, Basic Study” in the basic subject areas. Specialized program s, such as u ltra ­ sound technology at Bellevue C om m unity College, m ean th a t ultrasound technology books and jour­ nals are located at BCC, b u t these m aterials are in high dem and at the college and will not be readily available for interlibrary lending. Also, since com m unity colleges share the same state funds, they have relatively th e same problems in budgetary constraints for developing collec­ tions. Some libraries have an annual book budget of only $8,000 for new titles, w hich is not adequate for even m inim al m aintenance, m uch less “devel­ opm ent” or resource sharing. More fortunate li­ braries, w ith an annual book budget of $25,000 or m ore, m ay have areas of strength relative to the poorer libraries, but these areas of concentration are generally reflecting curriculum demands and are not likely to be sought out by other colleges or public libraries. In addition, the higher budget fig­ ures m ay reflect only interm ittent efforts to redress neglect, in which case the monies are used to fill long-standing gaps rath er th an to build recogniz­ ably strong collections in particular subjects. Furtherm ore, the faculty at com m unity colleges have teaching as their prim ary or sole function. They are not, generally, engaged in research, and do not have graduate students working on special­ ized projects, so th a t no m arked depth in any p a r­ ticular subject is likely to be generated by faculty requests. Thus, the focus of the LIRN project on coopera­ tive collection development and resource sharing does not, overall, address the realities, problems and needs of com m unity college library users. Nevertheless, the conspectus methodology did, w ith m odifications, prove useful in evaluating, weeding, and updating the science collection of the BCC library. R ather th an using th e LC classifica­ tion schedule to describe strengths and weaknesses 1W ashington State Board for Com m unity Col­ lege Education, A Study o f the Role o f C om m unity Colleges in the Achievem ent o f the Bachelor’s D e­ gree in W ashington State (Olympia: The Board, January 1989), 2. 2See L arry R. Oberg, “E valuating the Conspec­ tus Approach for Sm aller L ib ra ry Collections,” College ír Research Libraries 49 (1988): 187-96; and Stew art Saunders, H arriet Nelson, and Pris­ cilla G eahigan, “Alternatives to the Shelflist Mea­ sure for D eterm ining the Size of a Subject Collec­ tio n ,” Library Research 3 (1981): 383-91. relative to other libraries, the schedule was used to assess adequacy of th e collection in m eeting its de­ scribed purpose of curriculum support. Using syllabi provided by science instructors and course descriptions from the college catalog, I listed classification numbers for w h at the library ought to have in its science collection. This “c ata­ loging the curriculum ” was most direct in physics: the course description of a series of General Physics classes “includes units, kinem atics, vectors, dy­ namics, work and energy, m om entum , rotational m otion and harm onic motion; heat, tem perature, therm odynam ics, electricity and magnetism; wave motions, sound, light, geometric a n d physical op­ tics, relativity, and m odern physics.” Classification num bers for these topics, in shelf list order, are, in part: QA841-QA845 Motion QA846 Dynamics QA867 H arm onic Motion QC73 W ork and Power QC225 Sound; Acoustics Q C 311-Q C 320 H eat T ra n sfe r and T h e rm o d y ­ namics QC353-QC358 Light QC355 Optics QC448 Fiber Optics QC517-QC523 Electric Fields QC751 Magnetism My reasoning was th a t faculty or students re­ quiring m ore inform ation th an th a t provided by the class text on, for example, therm odynam ics, could obtain th a t inform ation from another cur­ rent physics textbook title owned by th e library (Q C 21) or fro m a book on th e rm o d y n a m ic s (Q C311-Q C 320). If the lib ra ry lacked cu rren t books in either area, the gap should be filled. A fter c o m p ilin g th e c la ssifica tio n n u m b ers whose presence on our shelves w ould indicate cur­ riculum support, I arranged them in correct sched­ ule order. I then com pared this list to th e current published LC classification schedules and supple­ m ented the list w ith the num bers for topics such as lasers, holographs and superconductivity, which were not described in either course descriptions or syllabi, b u t which should be covered by any up-to- date science collection. The project was taking place during the summer months, which m eant that-the m ajority of library books w ere present on the shelves. As a first step, how ever, I ta b u la te d under each classification n u m b er th e books, and th e ir co pyright dates, which were checked out. H aving com pleted this step, I began reading shelves. I chose this m ethod rather th an using shelflist cards because I w anted to record the frequency w ith which individual ti­ tles were checked out to identify areas of heavy use or lack of use. Notations from the Physics subject area read, for example: QA433 V ectors— “ no books specifically, b u t 582 / C&RL News subject is covered in geometry texts.” QX353-QC358 L ig h t—“except for one 1984 book, section consists of older books from the ’60’s. All the books are frequently checked o u t.” As I proceeded, I modified my methodology ac­ cording to the subject area. In com puter science, for example, I listed the specific languages and soft­ w are programs taught at the college and used sub­ ject headings rath er than call num bers to assess ad­ equacy. In chemistry, use indicated th a t we needed to update the basic textbooks, b u t could forego p u r­ chasing advanced works in m ore specific areas. From the assessment we learned th at most of the collection had been purchased soon after the li­ brary opened in 1966, and little weeding and re­ placem ent had transpired since then. I w rote to the most prom inent publishers of science books, ac­ quired their catalogs, w ent through them and se­ lected titles which w ould update the collection in specific topical areas. I also had an established file of titles selected from Choice, Library Journal, and Science Books and Films. I sent the science program chairpersons copies of the assessment results and lists of possible new ac­ quisitions. Response from the instructors was gen­ erally enthusiastic: they were pleased to note th a t a neglected area of the library had received intense scrutiny and were judicious in their selection of new book titles. Once the initial assessment had been completed and purchasing had commenced I had to grapple with the problem of m aintaining the collection ac­ cording to the conclusions I had reached. W e are not in the position of being able to tu rn our require­ ments over to a jobber and expecting this third party to m atch our profile to the m aterial avail­ able. My approach was to update th e assessment as new books came in; to review the assessment fre­ quently to keep fam iliar w ith its results and our progress in addressing deficiencies; to note on the assessment w hen old books w ere removed; and, at the end of the year, to balance circulation figures for each subject area w ith purchases and book costs, so as to plan the next year’s purchases. This project was successful in evaluating one area of the library collection. Its application in the social sciences is doubtful, because of the inherent inter-disciplinary nature of m any subjects. Busi­ ness topics in our library are best updated by peri­ odicals and standard reference tools. However, the English literature curriculum could be well served by a variation of this project, and this is the area targeted for assessment and development in the near future. ■ ■ A C R L p u b l i s h i n g p r o c e d u r e s Developed by the A C R L Publications Committee, and accepted by the A C R L Executive Committee at their Spring meeting. P ublications are a vital p a rt of academic librari- anship and the ACRL program . O ne of the p u r­ poses of ACRL is to prom ote and disseminate its members’ and units’ work in the fields of their ex­ pertise. The ACRL publications program is one m ajor means of engaging in this prom otion and dis­ semination. Publishing was identified as the num ­ ber one priority of ACRL members in a recent sur­ vey and ACRL units and members are generating ideas and projects th a t have publication potential in either a prin t or non-print form at. It is im portant th a t work completed by ACRL units be offered to ACRL for first publication con­ sideration. W ork of ACRL units may take the form