I'd like to speak to you today of the opportunities and

challenges facing the Indiana University Libraries, an

institution with which I have been associated for all but four

years since 1963.

The most significant challenge facing research libraries

today is the adoption of computer technology, or as some call it,

library automation. The application of computer technology to an

organization as large and complex as a modern research library is

a very expensive and labor-intensive proposition. Yet it is

something that must be done.

There is an underlying assumption in most library

automation projects: that data, once available in machine-

readable form, should never have to be re-entered. The prospect

of multiple uses of digitized data is one of the things which

excites us. Yet there are many other technological applications

which are needed in libraries.

More and more the process of scholarly research has been

based on the selection of needed information from a vast

storehouse of knowledge, unbounded by the walls of any

institution and not limited by state or even national boundaries.

The link between these diverse sources of information should be

an electronic one. Scholars need to be able to efficiently pick

and choose the information they need and have it delivered in a

timely fashion in any medium of their choosing: a photocopy,

microform, computer-readable data, or whatever other form they

want. We must make the investment to see that the opportunity

for research is not limited by just the resources of this

institution. To do so will require thoughtful planning and clear

guidance toward the most appropriate use of funds. It is

refreshing to note that the IU Libraries are taking a new look at

the available options for fully automating the IU Libraries

system.

To those on this campus who might scoff at the need for

library automation, let me say that this most pressing need is

not only for the users of the library. It is the librarians and

staff who most desperately need automation, not because it will

alleviate our incredible personnel shortage, for it will not. We

need library automation so that we may better utilize our time in

serving you, the users of the library system.

Let me turn to the personnel situation in the Libraries.

In 1985, in response to a request from Dean Elaine Sloan, the

librarians identified over 100 fulltime equivalent positions

which should be added to the units of the Bloomington libraries

in order to provide full service to this campus. I can assure

you that very few of those positions have been funded.

Significant amounts of money have been invested at IU in

the materials budget, the acquisitions budget from which books

and journals are purchased. I read in the August 26 Herald-

Telephone that one of the priorities of this campus is to double

the acquisitions budget. I for one say that unless you plan to

double the staff of the library to handle that increased

materials budget, let us continue to live with poverty! Library

materials do not automatically find their way into a library and

make themselves easily accessible for your use. It takes \people\

to make that happen. There are some 236 persons, including 21

librarians, 94 professional and support staff, and 121 FTE

students engaged in the process of acquiring, cataloging, and

preserving materials in the IU Bloomington libraries. In

1985/86, nearly 161,000 items were added to the collection. More

and more I have heard my librarian colleagues despair over an

attitude that is all too prevalent on this campus: that the

solution to the library's problems is to pour more funds into the

book and journals budget. If that were the solution, the

university could save itself a lot of money by simply ordering

everything through the IU Bookstore.

One of the achievements which has been noted in the

libraries in recent years is the creation of a Preservation

Department. This department was established in 1984 and equipped

using income from an NEH endowment. What may not be widely known

is that a microfilm camera purchased specifically for

preservation microfilming has long since gathered dust due to

lack of funds to hire an operator.

The Preservation librarian has recently left IU. Others

who have left the employ of the IU Libraries in the not too

distant past are the Systems Librarian, the Personnel Librarian,

the Librarian for Budget and Planning, and the Interlibrary

Services Librarian. I do not know whether salaries had anything

to do with their decisions to leave, but I want to share with you

a few facts about librarians' salaries.

First, the salary paid to a librarian is for a twelve-

month contract. The same dollar amounts which constitute the

ten-month salary floors for the equivalent teaching-faculty ranks

are paid to librarians for twelve months. When new floors were

established for faculty salaries this year, only 40 faculty on

the whole campus were below the floors. Nineteen of them were

librarians. The campus gave us half of the funds needed to bring

them up to the floors. Guess where the other half came from!

Surely it is time to correct this situation and bring the library

faculty up to the level of pay of their teaching colleagues. An

internal study of librarians'salaries showed that even if 2/12

were added to the salary of each of the 105 librarians at

Bloomington, we would still be the lowest paid faculty on campus!

It is clear that whatever progress has been made in improving the

overall salary picture for the library faculty is simply not

enough. We must have adequate compensation if we are to compete

for and retain the best librarians.

We have at IU a library faculty which has earned an

unsurpassed record for service in the library world. Their

talents, however, are being drained by a too-heavy dependence on

large numbers of student workers who must substitute for an

adequate level of full-time staff. The IU Libraries has one of

the highest ratios of FTE student help to full-time staff of any

university research library in this country. The constant

training and re-training of student help is certainly an obstacle

to better use of the talents of the full-time staff. While it is

entirely appropriate for the libraries to provide jobs for

student workers, it is time to re-examine their impact on our

overall efforts in the library system.

Much of what I have said to this point relates to

planning. Some believe that many of the library planning reports

of recent years have not had much real impact. Yet I remain

convinced and optimistic that the proper reorganization of the IU

Libraries and the proper reallocation of its resources are sure

to come. The issues I have raised above will, I hope, be

thoroughly addressed in the coming year.

Thank you for this opportunity to speak this afternoon.

Gary Wiggins

Head, Chemistry Library

9-1-87