Transportation Libraries
And Information Services Of State Governments: A Survey
presented
by
Jerome
C. Baldwin
Minnesota
Department of Transportation Library
at
the
Annual
Meeting, Transportation Division, Special Libraries Association
June,
1978
Over the last
several years, state departments of transportation (DOT) librarians
have been running into each other at various conferences and meetings.
Out of the shop talk at these sessions it became evident that neither
the needs nor the resources of state DOT libraries were being taken
into consideration in attempts to develop a national transportation
information system.
We felt that
a network of strong state DOT libraries would be essential to the
success of a national system, both as a means of resource identification
and sharing, and as a convenient means of access for the researcher.
We also felt that in order to develop such a network, we would need
the support of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation
Officials (AASHTO), the Transportation Research Board (TRB), the
U.S. Department of Transportation (U.S.DOT), and our own organizations.
In order to get this support, we would need to make them aware of
the potential benefits of such a network, as well as the strengths
and weaknesses of existing state DOT libraries.
As a vehicle
to achieve all this, we decided to form the Committee on Transportation
Library and Information Services in State Government. At the 1977
Annual Meeting of the Transportation Division, we set two tasks
for ourselves: to publicize the existence of the committee, and
to conduct a survey of the current status of state DOT libraries.
The first task
was accomplished by placing short articles explaining the purpose
of the committee in TRB News and the AASHTO Quarterly.
The response to these articles was rather amazing, and pointed up
the need for organizing a comprehensive transportation information
system. As Chairman of the committee, I received a number of letters
from people requesting more information on both our committee and
the Transportation Division. The letters came from as far as Belgium
and New Zealand,
and one actually asked for advice on setting up a state DOT library.
Our second task,
the survey, was begun last fall when we sent letters to the directing
authority of each state DOT. Barbara Russo of the Washington State
DOT Library, Josephine Said of Iowa, Kathy Fait of Wisconsin, and
John Thurman of Tennessee sent the letters and collected the responses
of the authorities in the states in each of the four regional associations
of state highway and transportation officials.
The letters
asked whether or not the state DOT had a library, and if so, the
name and address of the person in charge of the library. Eventually,
we got responses from all fifty states. Thirty-four of them claimed
to have something called a “library”. (Incidentally, Ann Sweeney
of the TRB Library identified at least one “library” within each
of the fifty state DOTs through the use of several mailing lists.
Our survey,
nevertheless, covered only the thirty-four identified by the directing
authorities. This was probably just as well since it was hard enough
getting information when we had the names of the individuals supposedly
in charge of the libraries, let alone dealing with blind mail addresses.
Once the thirty-four
names were received, we sent questionnaires to each, asking for
the standard information on staff, budget, collections, etc. The
first responses we got back were from two of the contacts saying
they really didn’t have a library, just a collection of reports
and magazines for the use of their staff. (This at least displayed
a more profound understanding of the word “library” than was shown
by many who answered the questionnaire). This left thirty-two states
to deal with. Eventually, responses were received from, or dragged
out of, all thirty-two.
Basically, what
we found is that only a little more than one-third of the states
claming to have a library had professional librarians in charge.
Ten states have libraries headed by individuals with an MLS; and,
an additional two or three head librarians had what seemed to be
the equivalent in education and experience. Of the remaining twenty-two
individuals in charge of the libraries, twelve had no college or
technical education, and the rest had various non-library college
degrees.
The word “library”
was used very loosely by this group of non-professionals. In one
case the main purpose of the so-called library was the sale of maps
and specification manuals; and in another, the distribution of road
plans. The use of the title “Librarian” was equally lax. In some
states, it was used by an individual with only a high school diploma
and a job classed in clerical civil service series.
There are some
interesting differences in the libraries headed by professionals
and those headed by individuals without credentials. All of the
professionally staffed libraries provide circulation, interlibrary
loan and photocopying services, while only two-thirds of those headed
by nonprofessionals do. Half of the professionally staffed libraries
have TRIS-On-Line available in the library, as opposed to only three
of the nineteen or twenty libraries headed by nonprofessionals
Three of the professionally staffed libraries have the capability
of searching other commercial data bases; none of the remainder
do.
In addition,
the libraries headed by professionals are better funded than are
the others. All of the professionally staffed libraries have some
budget for material, with the median amount being $10,000.00 of
the remaining libraries fourteen have no materials budget, and the
median for those that do is only $1,000.00. Of the thirty-two state
DOT libraries, only ten are not open to the public. Of this ten
only one is headed by a professional. Lest it be thought that the
libraries headed by professionals have no problems, I should add
that six of them operate with no clerical support.
The organizational
placement of libraries in Dots varies as widely as in other institutions.
However, the majority of those surveyed, nineteen, are in the administrative
division of their department. The next largest group, five, are
in the planning division, and the remainder are scattered in other
divisions.
To sum up, what
we learned is that the state DOT libraries are a mixed bag and the
contents of the bag keep changing. During the time our survey was
in progress, two DOT libraries folded, and a new one started. Staffing
in the libraries varies from six full time employees, of whom two
are professionals, to one half-time, temporary clerical employee.
Materials budgets range from nothing to a little more than $27,000.
Collections range from a couple hundred books and twelve periodicals
to 45,000 reports and 45 periodicals.
Probably the
most important task for our committee is the next one; educating
the holders of the purse strings. It is obvious from our survey
that there are a large number of states whose officials believe
they have in-house library service, but, in fact, are supporting
file rooms. The authorities in these states, along with those in
states which do not have DOT libraries, need to be shown the economies
and efficiencies that can be gained from adequate library services.
If we are successful
in these efforts, it will be a major step toward achieving the primary
goal of our committee. That is, providing all state transportation
officials and researchers convenient access to the full range of
transportation information.
Return
to Home
|
