College and Research Libraries C A R L H I N T Z Criteria for Appointment to and Promotion in Academic Rank To determine the status of librarians in the university community, what it means, and how it is determined, questionnaires were sent to one hundred major American academic institutions. Of eighty-seven respondents, seventy indicated that their librarians had academic sta- tus in one measure or another. There is need for clarification and standardization of practice. Criteria used for determining promotion are discussed, and a draft statement of policy in the matter is pro- posed. THE M O V E to grant academic status to librarians has been the prevailing trend for a number of years and is now gen- erally accepted, although the exact defi- nition of academic status remains un- certain. Regardless of the institutional pattern, however, it is evident that aca- demic status does carry with it certain privileges and obligations.1 Whenever obligations are involved, criteria must be formulated and applied to determine the degree to which the obligations are met. This paper is an attempt to determine the criteria and the procedures com- monly used for the evaluation of teach- ing faculty and the extent to which these criteria, or modifications thereof, are ap- plied to librarians. From this basis, it may be possible to draft for considera- tion a statement of policy and proce- dure. 1 Arthur M. M c A n a l l y , " P r i v i l e g e s a n d O b l i g a t i o n s of A c a d e m i c S t a t u s , " College and Research Libraries, X X I V ( M a r c h 1 9 6 3 ) , 1 0 2 - 1 0 8 . Mr. Hintz is University Librarian, Uni- versity of Oregon. This paper is one of a series of reports made by the Academic Status Committee of ACRL's University Libraries Section. The Committee invites comments from members of ACRL. In order to gather information, a ques- tionnaire was sent to the seventy-one academic libraries holding membership in the Association of Research Libraries plus a group of twenty-nine institutions, most of which were state universities. Replies were received from eighty-sev- en. Sixteen respondents indicated that librarians did not have academic status2 and one that "since practically all as- pects of this subject are under intense study . . . with a view to overhauling the whole plan, we deem it inadvisable to answer at this time." T h e material which follows, therefore, is based on replies from seventy institutions. T h e pattern used in the questionnaire emerges quite clearly in the analyses of responses which follows, with perhaps one exception. One series of questions concerned procedures for reviewing rec- ommendations for promotion with par- ticular reference to the existence and use of a "personnel committee." Within the context of this series of questions "personnel committee" referred to an in- stitutionwide committee to review all 2 I n t h e s e s i x t e e n libraries, h o w e v e r , a c a d e m i c s t a t u s w a s h e l d b y s o m e librarians i n five, r a n g i n g f r o m t h e director o n l y t o " a p p r o x i m a t e l y 4 3 p e r c e n t h o l d i n g f a c u l t y s t a t u s i n o n e o f t h e c o l l e g e f a c u l t i e s . " / 341 342 / College b- Research Libraries • September 1968 recommendations for promotion regard- less of the point of origin, as opposed to the device of internal school or depart- mental committees. F A C U L T Y R A N K AND T I T L E The largest group of the respondents -twenty-six—reported that librarians held full faculty rank and title. In these institutions the criteria generally used for faculty appointment and promotion ranked as follows: Success in teaching 2 5 Research and publication . . . . 2 5 Professional competence and activity . 24 Service to the university . . . . 23 Creative work (artistic, dramatic, etc.) 21 Public service 17 Advanced degrees 1 Length of service 1 Effectiveness in administrative assign- ment 1 Evaluation of department members of higher rank 1 No general criteria but determined by department concerned . . 1 By department concerned in part 3 Twenty-two indicated that these crite- ria, or others in general use on the cam- pus, were applied to librarians and four- teen that they were applied equally. Specific modifications listed were the following: Doctorate not required for promotion Greater stress on professional competence and nature of work performed Less emphasis on publication One respondent stated that all crite- ria were modified because of the nature of continuing assignments throughout a forty-hour week, a second that criteria are not rigidly applied "since the nature of our work and our work schedules pre- clude any great amount of formal teach- ing, research, or publication." Another made the cogent comment that since different persons apply criteria, they are not applied equally. This undoubtedly holds true elsewhere on the campus. Seven of the respondents indicated a separate set of criteria based on the gen- eral ones (so much so that some checked both answers) in the nature of "almost the same," "additional distinc- tive criteria for librarians," "librarian's evaluation," or "greater weight to pro- fessional activities than to publication and research." Practice varies in that twelve institu- tions had a campuswide personnel com- mittee to review all recommendations for promotion and thirteen did not. A more important point is that in twenty- one cases the procedure was the same for librarians and the general faculty. Five followed a different procedure; greater reliance was placed upon the recommendation of the library director and his key administrative personnel. E Q U I V A L E N T R A N K Thirteen institutions reported patterns of equivalent rank; i.e., a Librarian L-LV or L - V series, corresponding to the customary academic titles of rank, such as instructor to professor. In these institutions, the criteria gen- erally used for faculty appointment and promotion ranked as follows: Success in teaching 9 Research and publication . . . . 9 Creative work (artistic, dramatic, etc.) 8 Professional competence and activity 8 Service to university 8 Public service 4 Educational attainments 1 In applying these criteria, or others in general use on the campus, eight indi- cated that they were applied to librar- ians and four that they were applied equally. Specific modifications listed were the following: Two master's degrees accepted in lieu of doctorate Greater emphasis on professional compe- tence and performance Potential for long-term contribution to the institution Appointment to an Promotion in Academic Rank / 343 Five respondents indicated a separate set of criteria. In general, these repre- sent adaptations of general faculty crite- ria by expressing them in library terms. Five of the institutions in this group reported the existence of a campuswide personnel committee to review all rec- ommendations for promotion; seven did not. Eight of the thirteen libraries stated that the procedure followed was the same as for general faculty. Of the three which indicated a different procedure, the library administration played a greater part. A S S I M I L A T E D R A N K Seven institutions reported a pattern of assimilated rank; i.e., library title with the rank of . . . (catalog librarian with the rank of instructor). In these institu- tions, the criteria generally used for fac- ulty appointment and promotion ranked as follows: Success in teaching 7 Research and publication . . . 7 Professional competence and activity . 7 Creative work (artistic, dramatic, etc.) 6 Service to university 7 Public service 4 In applying these criteria, or others in general use on the campus, four indi- cated that they were applied in full to librarians and three others indicated that they were applied in part. On the question of equality of application, two felt that the criteria were applied equal- ly, two in part, and three responded in the negative. Three of the respondents felt that the criteria applied to librarians were not separate from those in general use on the campus. Three felt that they were sufficiently modified as to make them distinct. Four institutions utilized a campuswide personnel committee; three did not. Two reported exactly the same procedure for librarians as for gen- eral faculty. Three reported mixed pro- cedures and two reported different pro- cedures. In the latter two the decision making power rested with the library administration. V A R I A B L E P A T T E R N S The fourth group, comprising twenty- four respondents, reveals an almost be- wildering array of patterns under the general umbrella of academic status. Sixteen of the group reported that they held neither full faculty rank and title nor assimilated rank. The remainder provided mixed responses or no re- sponse at all on these points. In other words, twenty-four groups of librarians with academic status do not fall into any readily definable classification. The following are some illustrative schemes: Librarians with formal teaching duties hold faculty rank and title with all others holding assimilated rank Academic status and full faculty rank and title above instructor Department heads are also assistant profes- sors of library science. Non-department heads have not been assigned rank of in- structor, although this could be done if there seemed any reason No rank or tenure, but all other benefits, including membership on Senate, com- mittees, etc. No rank or membership on faculty, but fac- ulty benefits apply. Some librarians have been elected to membership in a college or school faculty Faculty status, but no formal rank. Voting power in faculty meetings and eligibility for election to Senate and other offices No rank, but all privileges and responsibili- ties, such as serving on Senate and com- mittees All rights of faculty, except title and some committee memberships Fully academic with review for advance- ment and appointment by Dean of Fac- ulty. Librarians do not carry title unless they ( 1 ) hold a teaching appointment or ( 2 ) are "with the rank of . . . ." The librarian holds faculty rank and title; seven associate or assistant librarians are "with the rank of . . . In effect, all perquisites except rank, tenure, and sab- baticals F 344 / College b- Research Libraries • September 1968 Status has been used to include sabbatical leave, voting in faculty meetings, com- mittee memberships. In short, every- thing except rank or rank equivalent, which is now being sought. Among this group, the criteria gen- erally used for faculty appointment and promotion ranked as follows: Research and publication . . 1 5 Professional competence and activity 14 Service to university 12 Success in teaching 11 Public service 7 Creative work (artistic, dramatic, etc.) 6 Academic qualifications . . . . 2 No general criteria 6 In applying these criteria, nine indi- cated that they were applied to librar- ians and five that they were applied equally. Nine respondents stated that separate criteria were used. Eight of the respondents reported the existence of a campuswide personnel committee to re- view all recommendations for promo- tion. In one instance, the committee re- stricted its jurisdiction to teaching facul- ty only. Nine replied that the proce- dures for the promotion of librarians were the same, or very similar, to those for teaching faculty. Of the eight re- porting a different procedure, the prin- cipal distinction rests in the greater role of the library administration. A P P L I C A T I O N O F C R I T E R I A The general tendency, repardless of the exact pattern for academic status, is to use the commonly accepted criteria for faculty evaluation although with modifications or special interpretations in some instances. Table 1 reveals some striking variations in application of fac- ulty criteria, degree of application, and the evaluative procedures for promotion between the four groups of institutions. Without attempting to read too much into this statistical exercise, it seems clear that institutions which have ac- corded full rank and title to librarians are evaluating them in terms of aca- demic criteria to a greater extent than those institutions which follow a differ- ent pattern of academic status. This finding is substantiated by the fact that the "variant group," where academic sta- tus is poorly defined or not at all, makes by far the worst showing in the applica- tion of academic criteria. In some cases, in this group, the criteria are simply ex- pressed in terms of a position classifica- tion (description) and suitability of the person for that position. Since one of the major questions is "Should, how shall, or do, or can librar- ians meet the same criteria as teaching faculty?" it is pertinent to examine the criteria as they pertain to librarians be- fore any consideration is given to the development of different criteria, or even substantial modification of existing ones. Many librarians are already meet- ing existing criteria, and there is no rea- son why more should not be able to do so, providing that their position descrip- tions called for them to do so, and if their work assignments were adjusted accordingly. 1. Success in teaching. This criterion requires special interpretation if it is to apply. Some librarians are engaged in formal classroom teaching, and many TABLE 1 Institutional Group Number of Institutions Per Cent F a c u l t y Criteria A p p l i e d Per C e n t Criteria Applied To Same Degree Per Cent S a m e Procedure F o l l o w e d Full rank and title . . . . 26 84.6 56.8 80.8 Equivalent rank 13 61.5 30.8 61.5 Assimilated rank 7 50.0 50.0 16.7 Variant 24 37.5 20.8 37.5 Appointment to an Promotion in Academic Rank / 345 more engage in informal teaching through their daily work with students in the library. Additional special exam- ples are library orientation lectures and guest lectures on bibliographic resources in subject areas. A possible substitution here would be performance of specific duties assigned in the library. In view of the lack of emphasis placed on teaching as a criterion for advancement in most universities, this factor should not weigh too heavily against librarians. 2. Research and publication. This seems to be the major roadblock, par- ticularly as it looms large in the promo- tion of teaching faculty. T h e fact that work schedules make research and writ- ing for publication difficult for librarians is a stark reality. Some librarians find it possible to meet this criterion. Perhaps more would do so if it were clearly un- derstood that it is expected of them. Conceivably, more personal recognition should be given to the bibliographical research performed by librarians in sup- port of the research activities of others and in the development of research col- lections and to administrative, internal studies and reports. 3. Professional competence and activ- ity. Demonstrated by performance on the job, by active participation in pro- fessional organizations (not limited nec- essarily to library associations), by evi- dence of continued growth, by mastery of bibliography, and by evidence of be- ing an informed person in matters of educational philosophy and administra- tion. 4. Service to the university. This may take the form of service on university committees, or working with student groups, such as foreign student organiza- tions, honorary and professional socie- ties, and others. 5. Creative work (artistic, dramatic). In addition to the obvious—creative writing, musical composition, painting, sculpture—participation in the perform- ing arts, such as theatrical productions and musical performances, qualifies. T h e planning and preparation of some li- brary exhibits involves considerable cre- ativity. 6. Public service. As evidenced by service to the wider community. F O R M A L C R I T E R I A Respondents were asked to describe criteria used for librarians if they were separate and distinct from those used for faculty in general and to send exam- ples of rating forms or other materials used in the promotion process if they could do so conveniently. T h e fact that most of the respondents failed to do so suggests that formal statements of this nature are either lacking in most institu- tions or are not readily available in con- venient form. T H E N E E D F O R P O L I C Y As pointed out at the beginning of this paper, academic status stands badly in need of definition. It is used to cover many differing circumstances, ranging from full faculty rank and title for li- brarians at one end of a spectrum to highly-structured position-classification situations which are considered academ- ic because appointments fall within the jurisdiction of the personnel officer for academic affairs (dean of faculties, vice- president for academic affairs, e t c . ) . Clarification on this point could take one of three forms: full faculty rank and title, assimilated rank, or equivalent rank. Of these, the preferred pattern is that of full faculty rank and title as be- ing most conducive to the development of a standard of librarianship which will best serve the educational, research, and scholarly needs of the academic com- munity. This is based on the assumption that the contributions of librarians in ac- ademic libraries are so closely allied to those of academicians in all phases that at times they verge on the inseparable. Support for this thesis is found in the fact that the institutions now granting 346 / College b- Research Libraries • September 1968 full rank and title to librarians are ap- plying generally a c c e p t e d a c a d e m i c cri- teria and p r o c e d u r e s successfully, and to a g r e a t e r e x t e n t than those institutions w h i c h do n o t grant such status. A SUGGESTED P O L I C Y S T A T E M E N T L i b r a r i a n s should b e a c c o r d e d recog- nition p r o p o r t i o n a t e to their qualifica- tions, experience, a n d duties. A librarian should h o l d a graduate library de gre e or e q u i v a l e n t from a r e c o g n i z e d institution, should p a r t i c i p a t e in professional library organizations, a n d should perform duties of a professional nature. T h e determina- tion of degrees to b e r e g a r d e d as termi- n a l or a p p r o p r i a t e should b e vested with t h e library faculty, s u b j e c t to t h e ap- proval of t h e president. P r o p e r recogni- tion consists of f a c u l t y rank, tenure, and salary, a n d t h e p r o c e d u r e f o r advance- m e n t provided f o r other f a c u l t y m e m - b e r s should apply to librarians. 3 C r i t e r i a f o r a d v a n c e m e n t of profes- sional library personnel i n c l u d e t h e fol- l o w i n g : A. T e a c h i n g or instructional effective- ness shall b e i n t e r p r e t e d t o m e a n t h e special kind of teaching, either group or individual, direct or indirect, that a librarian does. Such instruction m a y b e j u d g e d b y : 1. qualified student and faculty opinion; 2. i n f o r m a l opinion of colleagues; 3. effectiveness in t h e development and use of library resources for undergraduate, graduate, and re- search programs; 4. efficiency in t h e p e r f o r m a n c e of library t e c h n i c a l operations sup- 3 Since this will vary from institution to institution, no attempt is made to suggest a specific procedure here. porting instructional a n d research programs. B . R e s e a r c h or creative w o r k should b e rewarded, recognizing t h e severe limitations on such activities b e c a u s e of t h e demands on t i m e a n d energy. T h i s m a y b e j u d g e d b y : 1. p u b l i c a t i o n of books, articles, re- views, a n d reports of a scholarly n a t u r e ; 2. c r e a t i v e a c h i e v e m e n t involving m u s i c a l composition, creative writing, original d e s i g n , skillful production, and superior artistic p e r f o r m a n c e ; 3. preparation of h i g h - l e v e l adminis- trative studies; 4. m a s t e r y of b i b l i o g r a p h i c resources. C. Professional c o m p e t e n c e and activ- ity. T h i s m a y b e judged b y : 1. active participation in profession- al associations; 2. efforts for professional growth through f u r t h e r study; 3. study for advanced d e g r e e s ; 4. knowledgeability in m a t t e r s of ed- u c a t i o n a l philosophy a n d admin- istration. D . S e r v i c e t o university, including com- m i t t e e a n d administrative activity, is j u d g e d b y : 1. service a n d leadership in the in- t e r n a l affairs of t h e university b e - yond t h e duties of t h e position h e l d on t h e faculty; 2. supervision of library personnel; 3. d e m o n s t r a t e d administrative abil- ity and capacity for administra- tion. E . P u b l i c service includes participation on s t a t e w i d e committees, participa- tion in professional activities in t h e state a n d nation, consultation, a n d c o m m u n i t y service.