College and Research Libraries By ROBERT B. DOWNS The Current Status of University Library Staffs I APPEAR BEFORE YOU this evening with head bloody but unbowed. Perhaps I should be in a chastened mood, since some friends, whose views are consider- ably at variance with my own on this subject, have expressed grave doubts that I am capable of an objective dis- cussion of the status of university lihrar- ians.1 The doubts may be well founded, for in previous writings on the matter, my approach, frankly, has been somewhat partisan. Being firmly convinced that the morale, sound development, and all- round effectiveness of professional uni- versity librarians are related directly to the place assigned them in the institu- tional hierarchy, I have pleaded for a clear-cut, unambiguous recognition of these librarians as essential members of the academic community.· My assignment for today's program, however, is different. As objectively as possible, on the basis of information pro- vided by 115 leading American univer- sities, I propose to review the present status of university library staffs, profes- sionals only, and then conclude with a summary of current opinion among li- brary administrators as to the most de- sirable type of personnel organization. The survey is limited to universities, ex- cluding colleges, though the line of de- marcation is not always crystal clear, especially with the present trend toward adding the title of "university" to the name of every institution of higher edu- 1 P a per presented at a meeting of the University Libraries S ection of ACRL, June 26, 1957, at Kan sas City, Missouri. Dr. Downs is director of the library and library school} University of Illinois. SEPTEMBER 1957 cation, while, on the other hand, anum- ber of institutions which carry all the earmarks of universities are still being called colleges. A number of librarians with whom I corresponded made the point that we need a definition of academic status. Is it, for example, identical with faculty status? Here is evidently a question of semantics requiring clarification; other- wise, we will often be talking at cross purposes. In many universities, academ- ic status and faculty rank are not con- sidered the same thing. The librarian may feel that he has achieved academic status if he and his staff have been granted certain faculty perquisites, such as attending faculty meetings and march- ing in academic processions, even though these are not accompanied by academic titles. It is obvious that under this in- terpretation academic status is some- thing less than full faculty standing. May I suggest, though I realize this statement is debatable, · that university librarians have not established them- selves as definitely a part of the academ- ic community until they are recognized as being affiliated with the faculty. In short, academic and faculty should carry the same connotation. Anything less than that leaves the librarians in a kind of limbo, not precisely one thing or an- other. In practice, then, academic sta- tus for the librarian should signify that he meets standards for appointment equivalent to those specified for the classroom teacher. Likewise, in such matters as tenure, salary scales, sick leaves, retirement provisions, and sab- baticals he ought to be on a par with 375 other faculty members. As for titles, un- less the librarian is actually engaged in formal classroom instruction, it may not be essential for him to be accorded a formal rank, but library positions should be equated with those of the teaching faculty, e.g., an appointment might read "Reference Librarian, with rank of As- sociate Professor." Such assimilated fac- ulty rank explicitly fixes the librarian's place in th~ academic scheme and leaves no doubt about his exact status. Obviously; librarians may enjoy most traditional academic rights and privi- leges without regular faculty rank, as they are doing in a considerable num- ber of institutions. Nevertheless, they fall short of unqualified faculty status. So, with this much by way of defini- tion of the terms academic and faculty status, perhaps it will be simpler to make clear the existing situation among uni- versity librarians of the country. An analysis of the replies received from the group of 115 libraries reveals that there are three prevailing patterns for the organization of professional staffs. These are: (1) academic or faculty sta- tus; (2) separate professional group, which may be called administrative or professional, or be without any special designation; (3) civil service or other classified service plan. Variations within these three principal categories are nu- merous. Here is a summary of a rather confused situation. A total of 35 institutions, nearly one- third of the total, reported that profes- sional librarians are given faculty status, with titles. Another sizable group, about 27, have been granted academic status without ti ties. These vary from a few institutions which have developed specif- ic equivalent ranks for their staffs to others which are very nebulous about the definition of academic. These last shade over into an even larger number of universities where librarians are re- garded as belonging to a separate pro- fessional group. Some 43 libraries fall into this category. Again, however, the term "separate" or "special professional" can mean almost anything. For example, the librarians may be considered admin- istrative employees, they may be classed as clerical or non-academic, or their sta- tus may be so vague and indefinite that no one is quite certain where they be- long. In a considerable number of institu- tions, it is the practice to grant faculty titles to selected members of the staff and to classify the remainder in some other fashion. About 45 universities fol- low this plan. Only the chief librarian is granted such recognition in some in- stances, or it may be extended to asso- ciate and assistant librarians and de- partment heads. In still other cases, only librarians who actually teach, either li- brary or non-library subjects, are given titles. The third principal type of personnel organization, civil service or similar clas- sified scheme of service, is peculiar to state or other publicly supported institu- tions. Of those reporting, eleven have all or some portion of their staffs so organ- ized. Some libraries make exceptions for, or exempt from classified service, the top-ranking members of their staffs. At Minnesota, for example, all library de- partment heads were transferred a year ago to full faculty status, while the re- mainder of the staff is under university civil service. Similarly, at Wisconsin, fac- ulty rank is given to the director, his associates, heads of departments, and assistant heads of departments, with all others on state civil service. At Mary- land, about one-third of the professional 1nembers have faculty status and the others are under a state classified system. These cases are typical of others in the group which includes all branches of the University of California, University of Texas, University of Massachusetts, Howard University, Utah State Univer- 376 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES sity, University of Virginia, and Virginia Polytechnic Institute. Practical indications of the standing of librarians in an institution . are pro- vided by the kind of treatment they re- ceive in such matters as salary scales, tenure, sabbaticals, sick leaves, retire- ment provisions, and academic vacations. Fallowing is a review of the prevailing situation with respect to these several aspects of the librarian's working condi- tions: SALARY ScALES. In only a handful of institutions is any attempt made to es- tablish identical or comparable salary scales for librarians and teaching fac- ulty. Often, apparently by chance, sal- ary levels, especially for lower ranks, are approximately the same. Where there are differentials, library salaries are not necessarily inferior. In some instances, they may average somewhat higher at the instructor-assistant professor level. The acute shortage of librarians which has prevailed throughout the country in recent years has done much to cor- rect poor library salary conditions. One university librarian stated that he would be unwilling to assign faculty titles to his staff if this meant that their salaries would be equated with those of instruc- tors and assistant professors in such fields as English and French, though he would not be averse to having them paid on the engineering faculty scale. A closely related phase is the question of financial recognition of the fact that librarians are usually on twelve-month rather than academic-year appointments. In some institutions, an exact percentage , is added to a base salary for year-round service-which actually means in most cases eleven months out of the year. The percentage varies considerably, however, with, for example, Rutgers and Okla- homa A. & M. College allowing a 10 per cent bonus; South Dakota State College and West Virginia University 15 per cent; University of Arkansas 20 per cent; SEPTEMBER 1957 University of Denver 25 per cent; Uni- versity of Georgia 30 per cent; and Uni- versity of Illinois two-ninths. In a ma- jority of cases, though, there was either no recognition of the longer work pe- riod required of librarians, or ad just- ments were made on an individual basis without the use of any fixed formula. From my correspondence, it was appar- ent that librarians and university ad- ministrators were conscious of this prob- lem and in a number of institutions were working toward finding a proper solu- tion. There was no indication here, neces- sarily, that librarians were being dis- criminated against. In frequent instances, all or a substantial portion of a univer- sity's staff were on annual appointments. Especially in state institutions, research and extension staff members in agricul- t~re, engineering, and home economics serve eleven months out of the year, with a month's vacation. And, of course, this is nearly a universal custom with re- spect to administrative officers, presi- dents, deans, directors, and sometimes department heads. VACATIONS. The same principle carries over into vacation allowances. It is the exception rather than the rule for li- brarians to receive more than the stand- ard one-month vacation, to which may be added the usual holidays scattered through the year. Because library serv- ice is a continuous operation, it is gen- erally agreed that, at least in this re- spect, librarians should be treated like members of the administrative staff, rather than receiving the long academic vacations typically a perquisite of the classroom teacher. This rule is unlikely to change, unless ways and means can be found to increase substantially the size of library staffs. One institution, Utah State University, which has nine- month contracts for its librarians, re- ported that the short contract created real problems, "the chief one being the 377 allocation of duties to ad just to the ab- sence of a professional for three months." SICK LEAVES. In the matter of leaves re- quired by illness, universities are almost invariably generous. The usual practice is to treat the faculty and professional librarians alike in granting such leav~s. In some institutions, cases are decided on an individual basis. In others, there is a standard allowance of a given num- ber of days, weeks, or months off with full pay for each year of service. RETIREMENTS. In a majority of cases, faculty members and librarians are un- der the same retirement system, receiv- ing identical rights and privileges. In a few institutions, e.g., California, Chi- cago, Colorado, Harvard, Pennsylvania, Rochester, and Virginia, separate re- tirement plans are in effect for all or a majority of the library staff. These m-ay or may not be inferior to those provided for the teaching faculty. In several in- stances, it was claimed that provisions of the plans covering librarians were more liberal than those for the faculty. SABBATICALS. Sabbatical leaves for li- brarians are relatively rare. Only 22 out of the II5 universities questioned grant- ed such leaves regularly or occasionally. Others were reasonably generous in giv- ing leaves with pay for advanced study, particularly when such study was _iudged to be of direct benefit to the institution. A surprising number of universities, by the way, make no provision for sabbati- cals for their teaching faculties or for any other members of their staffs. This is a fringe benefit that might well con- cern such organizations as the AA UP and the American Federation of Teach- ers. TENURE. · Tenure as applied to librar- ians is in a somewhat anomalous state. Actually it is not a problem, since the shortage of librarians prevailing since 1940 has made libraries happy to retain staff members with any merit whatever. Under the tradi tiona! rules for academic tenure, however, only faculty members with the rank of professor or associate professor are entitled to permanent or indefinite tenure. In a few instances, it was reported that special rules had been devised to cover libraries. For example, the University of Rochester gives indefi- nite tenure to professional librarians after one year of satisfactory service, while Louisiana State University makes appointments permanent after three years. Under California's classified sys- tem, Donald Coney pointed out, "Ten- ure is not stated as such, but grievance procedures and hearings give virtual tenure and make dismissal without just grounds impossible." This is an advan- tage or disadvantag~, depending upon the point of view, of civil service regula- tions. Several librarians commented that, in regard to tenure, librarians were in a more favorable position than the teach- ing faculty. In the faculty, those with the rank of instructor or even assistant professor are on temporary appointment, and are expected to move on after a stated period of time. Such rules do not govern librarians, who therefore have more pennanence and more security than classroom teachers. OTHER PERQUISITES. Occasionally men- tioned were other perquisites, coming to the library staff, of a nature similar to those accorded the faculty. Several in- dicated that group insurance and group hospitalization plans were made avail- able to librarians on the same basis as to the faculty. Tuition exemption for the librarians and, in a few cases, for their children, a faculty privilege, was extended to the librarians at Columbia, Georgetown, Notre Dame, etc. Also fre- quently listed were such minor forms of recognition as membership in faculty clubs, attendance at faculty meetings, membership on faculty committees, and marching in academic processions. While 378 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LI~RARIES not of major significance, these were considered indicative of acceptance by the faculty of professional librarians on a somewhat equal footing. IN SEARCH OF AN IDEAL As the concluding question in the in- quiry sent to the university librarians of the country. I asked for personal opin- ions as to the most logical and satisfac- tory status for professional librarians in a university. Since the sentiments ex- pressed represent the university library leadership of the country, the results are significant. After all, if any progress is to be made toward an acceptable resolu- tion of our difficulties in this field, these are the men and women who must co- . operate in and direct any improvements. Exactly how the judgments of their li- brarians ought to be interpreted, how- ever, poses a dilemma, for the problem is still controversial, and wide dispari- ties in viewpoints exist. A preponderance of opinion favored "academic" status for librarians, but the definition of academic and the question of which members of the staff should be covered by the term were almost as var- ied as the respondents. Reading from left to right, i.e., from those who advo- cated faculty rank for every member of the professional staff to those who were disposed to resist to the limit the inclu- sion of librarians in the academic cate- gory, let me attempt to summarize the prevailing thought, making free use of direct quotation. Stuart Baillie, University of Denver: "Any method of classification other than faculty status for librarians abandons the possibilities and values of coopera- tion with a larger and more powerful group, namely the faculty. All other · methods which I have observed result in poorer salaries and less than com pa- rable working conditions." Flint Purdy, Wayne State University: "I am very much in favor of complete SEPTEMBER 1957 equality for librarians. I see no justifi- cation for their traditional status as sec- ond rate citizens." John Ottemiller, Yale University: "Professional librarians in a university should have academic status which in- cludes all of the rights and privileges of the faculty and comparable salary scales." · Lewis Branscomb, Ohio State Univer- sity: "The only status for librarians which I feel to be fully satisfactory is that of faculty rank and title for each member of the professional staff, de- signed to provide the best possible at- mosphere in which librarians can really perform as academic members of the university community." Kenneth LaBudde, University of Kan- sas City: "In the future a director can not build a library staff which will per- form in a satisfactorily academic man- ner unless its members have full aca- demic status. A director knows he can make the library the heart of the uni- versity only if he has highly qualified personnel. He can not attract such peo- ple if the institution does not recognize their worth by the status which it ac- cords them." Norman Kilpatrick, Florida State Uni- versity: "It is extremely helpful in hir- ing staff to be able to give them aca- demic rank .... As I reflect upon the present modern university set-up with its various administrative officers, coun- selors, and others who take an active part in student education, it seems to me that there is less and less reason for a university to n1ake hard and fast distinc- tions between the faculty that teach in the classrooms and those who teach out- side the classroom." Ralph Parker, University of Missouri: "My opinion on the most satisfactory status for librarians has changed within the past ten years. In both institutions where I was chief librarian before com- ing to the University of Missouri, mem- 379 bers of the library staff had full faculty status. At that time I considered status unimportant. At the University of Mis- souri I see that there are many difficul- ties which are reflected in the institu- tional policy of not granting faculty sta- tus . I have come to feel that faculty sta- tus for librarians is not of itself signifi- . cant, except that institutional attitudes which are conducive to better library service will also favor the granting of fac- ulty status as explicit evidence of that attitude." Howard Rovelstad, University of Maryland: "After considerable study of the question of faculty status, I am com- pletely convinced of the desirability of being identified ··with the faculty. The only means of obtaining this identity for the entire professional staff is to be granted faculty status." Thelma Brackett, University of New Hampshire: "Since faculty status was achieved for all librarians, there has been a marked improvement in faculty relationships and 'in librarians' morale. I am firmly in favor of the present ar- rangement and see no logical argument against faculty status for all profession- ally trained librarians." · Archie McNeal, University of Miami: "I feel that close identification with the teaching staff is likely to produce a bet- ter understanding of the role of the li- brary in the educational program, and encourages the faculty to share with the library staff in developing the resources needed to accomplish their purpose." William Jesse, University of Tennes- see: "Of all the arguments for faculty rank, I believe the one of giving the in- dividual a sense of belongingness with the academic rather than the non-aca- demic or nebulous groups is the most valid. We have had academic rank for seven years, and it has been most help- ful." William Baehr, Kansas State College: "There has to our knowledge never been any question about the wisdom and the propriety of according faculty rank to librarians on this campus. We make it a point in our contacts with the faculty to emphasize the advanced type of train- ing that we require on the part of pro- fessional librarians. . . . I constantly hear from both library workers and from members of the teaching faculty that one of the greatest values in faculty standing for the library staff is in the area of rec- ognition and acceptance on the part of the rest of the faculty. It improves the morale of the library staff and it adds to the confidence of the general faculty in the library staff. I find the matter of faculty standing important when trying to persuade library school candidates to come to Kansas State." The foregoing comments are repre- sentative of those received from about forty librarians who were on the side of unqualified faculty status. Another con- siderable group adopted a middle-of- the-road attitude, suggesting a gradual approach, or faculty status for selected members of the staff. This group tended to emphasize qualifications for appoint- ments. Typical were the views stated by Daniel J. Reed, University of Detroit: "I believe that the majority, if not all, librarians should have faculty sta- tus, but they must be fully worthy of it. They must be in some sense scholars and teachers comparable to the rest of the teaching faculty. Merely technical competence is not sufficient grounds for granting faculty status to professional li- brarians. . . . I am much more inter- ested in a librarian's general education and in his competence in some field of knowledge that I am in his grasp of techniques. University librarians must know something about the inside of books. I have no reservation about giv- ing faculty status to this type of librar- ian." A similar point of view was expressed by Edmon Low of Oklahoma A. & M. 380 COLLEGE Al\lD RESEARCH LIBR A RIES College: "I feel the usual library school Masters graduate without experience, who is immediately given the rank of instructor, is not as extensively or as rigorously trained, and perhaps not as able, as is the average instructor in th~ subject fields for which a Ph.D. is usu- ally required. More favorable compari- sons can be made, however, in engineer- ing, home economics, and other fields of the pure and applied sciences where many practical compromises are made." Other aspects were stressed by Donald Smith, Washington State College: "The privileges of faculty appointment are very nice indeed-tenure, salary, sab- baticals, and the rest. But faculty mem- bership carries with it faculty responsi- bility as well: membership on faculty committees throughout the institution, participation and leadership in the in- tellectual life of the institution and the community, etc. It requires professional- ism in the real sense of the word rather than the watered-down version common- ly used .... Faculty membership based on the possession of a library school de- gree seems to me of very doubtful value. I would prefer to have the library staff attached to the academic administration, but not automatically members of the faculty, and with provisions for giving individuals real faculty status when they have demonstrated their intellectual qualifications and have been accepted as colleagues by the instructional and re- search groups." Mr. Smith's attitude was supported by L. H. Kirkpatrick of the University of Utah: "I believe for university staff members to receive the status they want they must be careful to conduct them- selves as members of a profession. This includes a keen interest in the intellectual life of the campus, fidelity to th~ welfare of the institution beyond pu~ching a clock, and using their talents in profes- sional work rather than spending part of their time in work which clerical help SEPTEMBER 1957 could do." Mr. Kirkpatrick conceded, however, that, "It is hard to separate, even in teaching, all of the sub-profes- sional work from the professional group. Many teachers regard correcting of tests and papers as something which is purely clerical while others claim it is a very important part of the teaching process. The same thing goes for certain areas in library work." Several penetrating observations were also made by Eugene Willging of Catho- lic University: "In general I would think that it would be a mistake to state that all professional librarians in colleges and universities should be granted ex-officio academic status on the same levels as faculty members. . . . Wherever profes- sional library knowledge is added to aca- demic subject knowledge, as in the case of departmental and divisional libraries, and wherever the individuals involved through their own experience seem .to deserve such status then I believe a case could be made. Therefore, it is my opin- ion that you can't adopt a · straight across-the-line policy in this respect. Each case probably should be judged on its own merits and should be passed upon by a joint academic-library com- mittee much along the same line that promotions are handled from the aca- demic side." · Robert Vosper, University of K~nsa~, might be described as a reluctant con- v~rt to the idea of academic status. "My personal conviction, which may be some~ what old-fashioned," stated Mr. Vosper, "is that professional librarians should and can maintain a position of dignity and importance on the campus simply as librarians and without necessarily ty~ng themselves onto a faculty pattern. I think they should and could secure as many specific 'pri~ileges' as they may want, but I think these can be secured in most cases without adopting formal- ·ized faculty titles ·and the like. I have a conviction that without too much overt 38i effort librarians, simply as librarians, can achieve whatever status they want if they will only produce adequately in the academic community. By this I mean that any librarian who displays genuine- ly academic competence, such as by pub- lishing, will be accepted at face value in the academic community and will re- ceive all the privileges he may wish. On the other hand, I have a frank feeling that too many librarians want something called academic status without really be- ing willing to face up to the responsi- bilities involved to the same degree that ·the teaching staff measure up. This in- volves continual growth and education on one's own, publication or something equivalent, wholehearted participation in the total academic program, and the like. All that I have said so far reflects a very personal opinion and one that is shared by a small number of my col- leagues, but on the other hand I recog- nize that the majority of this staff, as well as many another staff, wants some kind of formalized academic status and that good morale probably requires it these days. Moreover, the trend seems slowly to be in this direction, so my gen- eral policy has been to accept the fact that I am in a minority opinion. Conse- quently, I am taking steps to try to se- cure some kind of formalized situation here." Mr. Vosper is by no means alone - in ·~ his view that, as Paul Buck of Harvard expressed it, "Librarians in a university should stand on their own feet as con- tributors of an essential element in the total educational function of the uni- versity." Mr. Buck went on to say that, ''Librarians should be recognized as skilled professional workers who must meet ~high standards to qualify for suc- cessful work in a complex ·research li- brary. Such recognition should be re- flected in · salary scales commensurate with their qualifications and the im- portant tasks they perform. Their status should be fully as professional as that of the teaching staff, with participation in the faculty retirement plan, medical insurance, faculty club, and other social organizations and with all other privi- leges that will contribute to their fullest professional effectiveness. Librarians in policy-forming positions should of course be voting members of the faculties." Mr. Buck's point of view was endorsed by Guy Lyle of Emory, Eugene Wilson of Colorado, Benjamin Powell of Duke, ] ohn Berthel of Johns Hopkins, and others. On the other hand, we have the voice of experience speaking in the person of Ralph Ellsworth, who remarked, "In a way, I agree with those who feel that the term 'librarian' best describes us, that we should not seek other titles but rather should insist that librarians have the same privileges and working condi- tions the teachers do. The trouble with this is that things don't quite work out ·that way. The Illinois solution ri.e., aca- demic status for all professional librar- ians1 is best in the long run, in my opin- ion, because if given a chance to oper- ate 25 years, it will create the best kind of service to students and faculty, and that is what we should be thinking about!" The "separate but equal" concept, which, incidentall y, the U. S. Supreme Court rejected in another connection, is in vogue in a number of libraries. ]. R. Ashton of the University of North Da- kota, for example, advocated a special classification for professional librarians, which, he suggested, "would ideally have .five steps, corresponding to academic rank from instructor to dean, would carry salary equal to twelve-ninths of the salary of the corresponding academic rank, and would entitle the librarians to all privileges and responsibilities of the faculty." Likewise, Hugh Montgomery of the University- of Massachusetts believed 382 COLLEGE AND RESEA_RCH LIBRARIES that "professional librarians should have the same status as academic faculty but should not be tied in directly with teach- ing positions insofar as classification is concerned." He favored "the idea of an administrative classification which is comparable with the academic classifica- tion." An equivalent classification schedule was also recommended by Lewis Stieg, University of Southern California, Wil- liam Ready, Marquette University, Mar- vin Miller, University of Arkansas, Wil- liam Dix, Princeton University, and others. An interesting compromise solution was proposed by Raynard Swank, Stan- ford University. Mr. Swank ·suggested that a university's entire staff be divided between academic and non-academic. The academic staff would be further di- vided into two main groups: first, the teaching faculty, and second, other pro- fessional members, including librarians, research associates, counselors, etc. "This conception," suggested Mr. Swank, "calls for academic status for librarians along with other professional non-teaching groups in the University, but it avoids the difficulties, com promises, and some- times embarrassments attendant upon the effort to fit librarians into categories designed for the teaching faculty. I would rather see librarians recognized as academic, as equals to the faculty, in their own right as librarians than de- pendent for their status upon the imi- tation of faculty ranks." Still another form of organization is possible: a classified or civil service type of personnel set-up. In general, univer- sity librarians view civil service with a jaundiced eye. There are defenders, however, who maintain that it has some sound features. Louis Kaplan, U niver- sity of Wisconsin, for example, stated that, "State civil service gives us many advantages. It gives us ready-made a good set of rules with respect to hours SEPTEMBER 1957 of employment, sick leave, etc. For our top positions, where the formal rules of state civil service are a handicap, we are fortunately free to give faculty status, but this too has its disadvantages in that salary promotions are less regular com- pared to those given to the classified civil servants." The most conspicuous illustration of a classified service for professional per- sonnel is the system which prevails throughout the University of California Libraries, Berkeley, Los Angeles, and elsewhere. There the library staff is part of the non-academic staff of the U niver- sity, and are subject to the University's non-academic personnel policy as admin- istered by the Personnel Office. Library classifications and pay scales, both pro- fessi?nal and non-professional, are estab- lished by the President. Development of classification and pay scales is carried on by the non-academic Personnel Office in consultation with the Library admin- istrators. Donald Coney at Berkeley and Lawrence Powell at Los Angeles are con- fident that the plan provides a logical and satisfactory status for the Univer- sity's professional librarians. Mr. Powell noted that the professional library staff at California participated in and agreed with the decision to include librarians in the category of non-academic person- nel. There may not be complete unanimity on the virtues of this system, however, for the director of a university library in another region of the country, for- merly associated with California, ad- vised against permitting professional li., brarians to fall under the California type of non-academic personnel admin- istration. A new element was injected into the picture of status last year when the Council of the American Association of University Professors ruled "that . librar- ians of professional status . are engaged in teaching and research," and therefore 383 are eligible for AAUP me1nbership. What is meant by professional status? As interpreted by the AA UP Council , an applicant for membership must meet three conditions: (1) Have an appoint-. ment at an eligible institution for at least one academic year ; (2) have "the status of member of the faculty, or the academic rank of instructor or its equiv- alent or higher, at that institution; and (3) his work under that appointment consists of at least half-time teaching or research or both." Obviously, these con- ditions could be met only by librarians who have been granted academic status. Otherwise, they are ineligible for mem- bership in this large, influential organi- zation, sometimes facetiousl y referred to as the "Professors' Union." According to a recent report, 738 librarians have joined the AAUP, making librarians twentieth in a list of 46 subject fields. · Are there any valid conclusions that can be drawn from the wide range of viewpoints represented by the librarians from whom I have quoted or whose opinions I have summarized? Actually, I believe that we are much closer to a consensus than may appear on the sur- face. Though university librarians may differ on the best methods to achieve the desired goals, there appears to be complete unanimity among them on thes~ points: I. The maintenance of high standards for professional staff appointments, in order to place the preparation of librari- ans as nearly as possible on a par with their colleagues in classrooms, and to in- sure · top-notch library service to faculty and students. 2. Through academic status, equivalent rank, or special professional classification to entitle librarians to all appropriate rights, privileges, and perquisites received by the teaching faculty. , 3. To obtain general acceptance and recognition of the essential value of the librarians' contribution to the educational and research programs of the universities of the country. These matters are basic. Much less certainty prevails as to what kind of or- ganizational machinery will best serve to reach the broad objectives. An over- whelming majority of university library administrators, however, have apparent- ly come to the conclusion that close identification with the teaching faculty is most likely to accomplish our aims. This may take the form of (1) faculty status, with each librarian assigned suit- able rank in the faculty hierarchy, or (2) inclusion of the professional staff in the academic classification, with equiv- alent ranks, or (3) definition of librar- ians as academic without any attempt to integrate exactl y library positions with faculty ranks. A minority of the respondents favored other solutions. Most of these supported the position that librarians should be self-reliant and independent, rather than being incorporated into the teaching faculty. Even some librarians who voted for academic status expressed the wish that librarianship might eventually win recognition as deserved, distinct, and well defined as longer-established pro- fessions . In that case, as one person ex- pressed it, "they should take pride in their own separate status as librarians." Doubtless, from a long-range point of view, we are all convinced that we should work toward strengthening li- brarianship as a profession. Viewing the matter realistically, however, we know that cannot be accomplished overnight, and meanwhile, as a well-known states- man once remarked, "It is a condition which confronts us, not a theory." It should also be pointed out that the law- yers, doctors, dentists, engineers, chem- ists, architects, ministers, and other members of solidly established profes- sions are ordinarily given academic titles when employed on a university facult-y or staff. If librarians contribute as sub- 384 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES stantially as we believe that they do to- ward the achievement of an institution's educational purposes, why should they not also be accorded formal recognition? A fitting conclusion to this discussion might be a quotation from a letter writ- ten by Roscoe Rouse, Baylor University, who co"mmented, "This, like many uni- versity library problems, has no set an- swer. I think it is a mistake for anyone or any association to proclaim that all college and university librarians in the country should have faculty status. Each campus has its own distinct problems." Incidentally, the entire professional li- brary staff at Baylor has faculty status. As Mr. Rouse pointed out, conditions vary from one institution to another. In some of the older, privately endowed universities, for example, the require- ments for professorial appointments are extremely rigid. The teaching faculty is jealous of its prestige and is opposed to bringing into its ranks any who do not conform to the traditional patterns for academic training and advancement. For like reasons, I might add paren- thetically, these individuals often fight the introduction of new disciplines, seeking to preserve the classical nature of the university's curriculum. In such situations, the librarians may have to settle for an administrative classification, or perhaps for a ruling identifying them as belonging to the academic category without faculty status. Other institu- Mayo Celebrates Jubilee tions, more typically state universities, are flexible in their definition of faculty, and may include the research staff, extension workers, librarians, editors, deans, athletic coaches, student counse- lors, radio and television personnel, and others who play a direct and substantial part in the educational and research ac- tivities of the institution. At the beginning of this report, I promised to make my presentation of this subject as unbiased as possible. To conclude my remarks, however, I want to throw in a small amount of bias, or at any rate some personal opinions. First, as librarians, I do not believe that we want to cheapen high standards for fac- ulty appointments by according such standing to poorly-qualified staff mem- bers. Librarians must offer equivalent qualifications if they are to expect aca- demic recognition. In some instances, if an entire staff cannot come up to the specifications, a gradual approach may be preferable. Furthermore, for academ- ic advancement, criteria similar to those used for the teaching staff should be fol- lowed, including, in addition to educa- tional and professional attainments, con- tinued interest and participation in the activities of library associations, research in problems of librarianship, writing for publication, and other evidences of pro- fessional maturity. Given these basic con- ditions, I have not the slightest doubt that librarians should be accepted as an integral part of a university faculty. The Mayo Clinic Medical Library is celebrating its jubilee year. The librarv was established as a unit March l, 1907. The collection now totals ninety-five thousand volumes. It is particularly strong in basic journal literature of medicine and in rare editions of the early medical treatises. The clinic staff have William W. Mayo to thank for his early recog- nition of the value of a good library to effective medical practice and research, for the personal collection of Dr. Mayo provided the nucleus for the library. SEPTEMBER 1957 385