Search results

NORMAN ROBERTS, Senior Lecturer at Sheffield University school of librarianship, spent three weeks in Nigeria in November/December, running a British Council‐sponsored library management seminar at Ibadan University Department of Library Studies. Other travellers to Nigeria a week or two earlier were K C Harrison and Hugh Barry, for the inaugural meeting of the Commonwealth Library Association in Lagos. A visitor of longer standing, Ronald Benge, was due back at College of Librarianship Wales before Christmas, after spending last term as visiting Reader at Ahmadu Bello University Department of Librarianship in Zaria, northern Nigeria.

Some results of a recent study of the information needs of social scientists are selectively summarised and commented upon. Where relevant, to monitor change, this is set in the context of earlier research, notably during the peak period of the 1970s. This paper is not, however, in any sense intended as a balanced state of the art review of research and system design progress since 1970. Instead, it concentrates on the fresh evidence provided by a small‐scale qualitative study by depth interview amongst social scientists, broadly defined, and intermediaries in the social science area.

Resource sharing is an important element in the national planning of library and information services to meet the needs of information, education and culture of the whole community at all levels. An overview of resource sharing practices is presented, with particular reference to the British scene. It is also argued that, with the approach of the Single Market in 1992, resource sharing should now be considered on a European scale. In conclusion, some problems associated with the practice of resource sharing are considered.

The Disabled Living Foundation (DLF) is a national charity providing information on daily living equipment for disabled people. In 1984 a computerisation project began. One problem addressed has been the subject retrieval of information. This has involved the assessment of classification and thesaurus schemes. The DLF has developed a thesaurus to satisfy local needs and language, while remaining aware of existing classifications and thesauri in the same or proximate subject fields. Such schemes include for example, the Nordic Classification of Technical Aids for Disabled People, BSI ROOT Thesaurus, DHSS DATA thesaurus. The DLF thesaurus has been developed under considerable pressure but has attempted to respond to theory in the field as well as practical requirements. It is the result of both librarianship skills and the detailed occupational therapy and physiotherapy subject knowledge of the DLF information officers. This article sets the DLF thesaurus in context.

Continuing education for library and information management Ealing College of Higher Education is using a grant from BLR&DD to examine two main areas: para‐professional education and the coordination of external course provision. The present project, which runs from October 1985 to March 1986, is building on past work at Ealing. Ealing has developed a substantial database of short courses in librarianship and information science with details of cost, duration, location and subject. The work on para‐professional education will assess staff needs and will note experience in other countries, including the United States. The study of coordination will involve surveying course providers to see how they decide what courses to arrange, and how to price and market them. Further details are available from Dr Stephen Roberts, Ealing College of Higher Education, School of Library and Information Studies, St Mary's Road, Ealing, London W5 5RF (Tel: 01–579 4111 ext.3337).

The notion of a good library lies implicit in much service. It can rest on objective factors, like the speed with which documents are retrieved, and on subjective ones such as how helpful the library staff happen to be. Often our view draws on both. For librarians and library managers, too, there is a need to consider the goodness of the system. It may lie in its rate of satisfaction, in its market penetration, in the subtle integration of user education programmes into the curriculum, the cost‐effectiveness of the aquisition arrangements, or the work elicited from staff each week. Looking at the good library, then, impels both users and staff, clients and managers, to consider — and then test operationally — performance measures.