College and Research Libraries Librarians' Satisfaction with Faculty Status Marjorie A. Benedict In 1982 and 1989, librarians with academic faculty status in eight institutions of a large state university system responded to a questionnaire that probed their opinions on faculty status for librarians. A majority of the respondents in both surveys expressed satisfaction with and support for faculty status. The evidence suggests that librarians' satisfaction with faculty status correlates with insti- tutional compliance with the ACRL Standards for Faculty Status for College and University Librarians. f the many articles published on the subject of faculty status for librarians, most have been either opinion pieces or de- scriptions of conditions of faculty status in various institutions. While these stud- ies have been useful, few of them have elicited librarians' perceptions of faculty status. In a 1987 article reviewing thirty- six faculty status surveys published be- tween 1971 and 1984, Janet Krompart and Clara DiFelice indicated that only eight had asked for the respondents' opinions. 1 The purpose of the present study is to document the feelings about faculty status of a selected group of prac- ticing librarians. BACKGROUND AND METHODOLOGY This study consists of a survey con- ducted in 1982 and again in 1989. Ques- tionnaires were administered to the librarians at four types of institutions in the State University of New York (SUNY) sys- tem: two-year community colleges, four- year colleges of arts and sciences, university centers (doctorate granting), and graduate and professional schools (medical schools). Two institutions of each type were identified for the surveys. Other than including representatives from different parts of the state, the only selec- tion criterion was the availability of a cooperating librarian in each library to distribute, collect, and return the question- naires. One hundred four questionnaires were returned in 1982 and 88 in 1989, representing response rates of 69% and 62%, respectively. When the responses had been tallied, the results were compu- terized and analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS). Copies of the questionnaire are available from the author. The investigator conducted the 1982 survey with a collaborator, Hanan C. Selvin, and reported the results in an unpublished paper presented at the 1982 annual conference of the SUNY Librari- ans Association. In order to update the findings of that survey and to discover whether any significant changes had oc- curred during the intervening years, the investigator administered the survey again in 1989, polling the librarians at the same institutions, except for one of the two-year colleges. As the nation's Marjorie A. Benedict is Associate Librarian in the Collection Development Department of the Univer- sity Libraries at the University at Albany, State University of New York, Albany, New York 12222. 538 Librarians' Satisfaction with Faculty Status 539 TABLE 1 RESPONDENTS' PERSONAL CHOICES OF STATUS Academic faculty status Nonteaching professional Special category, manager, or civil servant No preference or no response largest higher education system whose librarians have been academic faculty members for many years, SUNY pro- vided a useful population to study. FINDINGS Respondents' Satisfaction with Faculty Status The participating librarians demon- strated their approval of faculty status in both 1982 and 1989 in response to the question: "If you had a choice in your present job, what kind of status would you choose for yourself?" About two- thirds stated that they preferred aca- demic faculty status to any other kind of status (see table 1 ). Some of these respon- dents commented about the benefits of being part of a larger, more powerful group; one wrote, "As part of the faculty, we have more clout; [there is] strength in numbers." In both surveys, among the one-third of the respondents who said they would not prefer academic faculty status, most indicated that they would prefer non- teaching professional status. In the SUNY system, all professional employees have faculty status, but the academic faculty consists of only the librarians and the teaching faculty. Certain perceived ad- vantages (salary discrepancies in favor of the nonacademics, for example) may account for a preference for nonacademic status among some of the librarians. Ten percent of the 1982 respondents and 19% of the 1989 respondents said they did not think that faculty status for All Respondents 1982 1989 % (N) % (N) 68 (71) 65 (57) 21 (22) 23 (20) 11(11) 9(8) 0 ( 0) 3 ( 3) TOTALS 100 (1 04) 100 (88) librarians was at all fitting (see table 2). One of them commented, "Librarians have most of the responsibilities; few of the perks. Nominal [faculty] status seems to be more trouble than it's worth." Some librar- ians do not welcome the professional re- sponsibilities that academic faculty status entail, but the comments of these respondents suggested that very often the real problem is not faculty status, but the lack of adequate administrative sup- port for librarians' professional and scholarly activities. In spite of the drawbacks of nominal faculty status, most of the respondents felt that academic faculty status is appro- priate for librarians and that librarians should continue to strive for equitable status as faculty members. Their responses to two questions·particularly demonstrated this conviction. One question asked: "All things considered, do you think that it is fitting for librarians to have academic fac- ulty status resembling that of instructional faculty?" Eighty-eight percent of the 1982 respondents and 80% of the 1989 respon- dents agreed that such status was fitting, with replies ranging from "somewhat" to "completely'' (seetable2). Theotherasked to what extent the respondents agreed with the statement: "It would be in the best interests of academic librarians to work harder to achieve equitable status as fac- ulty members." Sixty-seven percent of the respondents in 1982 and 58% in 1989 agreed, most of them strongly (see table 3). Several authors have rejected faculty status and have advocated a separate TABLE 2 SUNY LIBRARIANS' OPINIONS ABOUT FACULTY STATUS (.11 ~ c No Response Opinion Questions Completely A Great Deal Somewhat Not At All Or Doesn't Apply n 0 -1982 1989 1982 ·1989 1982 1989 1982 1989 1982 1989 -tl> OQ %(N) %(N) %(N) %(N) %(N) %(N) %(N) %(N) %(N) %(N) tl> ~ All things considered, do you ~ tl> (I) think it is fitting for librarians to tl> have academic status resembling I» lot n that of instructional staff? 35 (36) 41 (36) 28 (29) 17 (15) 25 (26) 22 (19) 10 {10} 19 (17) 3 (3) 1 (1) ::T Generally speaking, are you r-c .... a- satisfied with faculty status as lot I» it is defined and practiced in ::!. your library? 11 (11) 9 (8) 13 (14) 30 (26) 43 (45) 33 (29) 33 (34) 24 (21) 0 (0) 5 (4) tl> (I) In general, for you as an individual, do the benefits of 28 {29} 26 {23) 6 (6) 8 {7) faculty status outweigh the costs? 15 (16) 24 (21) 21 (22) 27 (24) 30 (31) 15 {13) Do you think that faculty status enriches the careers of academic librarians? (1989 survey only) X 25 (22) X 31 (27) X 25 (22) X 17 (15) X 2 (2) To what extent do you feel like a full-fledged member of the academic faculty? 11 (11) 7 (6) 24 (25) 26 (23) 45 (47) 48 (42) 17 (18) 16 (14) 3 (3) 3 (3) Are you generally satisfied with the criteria in the ACRL Standards for Faculty Status for College and University Librarians? 10 (10) 23 (20) 30 (31) 36 (32) 37 (38) 23 (20) 5 (5) 8 (7) 19 (20) 10 (9) Do you believe that faculty status z has upgraded the profession of 0 < academic librarianship? tl> (1982 survey only) 13 (13} X 27 (28) X 37 (38) X 22 (23) X 2 (2) X !3 a- tl> lot 1982:N=104 1-1 \0 1989:N=88 Responses are reported as percentages rounded to the nearest whole number. \0 1-1 en c:o Q) ~ en Q) Q) c,! as Q) UJ"'C ·- 0 c:::E Cl) "'C '(j Cl) c N c:o en en c:o en N c:o en en c:o en N c:o en ~ 0 LO ~ 0 CX) ~ 0 ~ 0 Librarians' Satisfaction with Faculty Status 541 (i; ..0 E :::J c:: Q) 0 ..c. ~ (;) ~ ro Q) c:: Q) £ .9 "0 Q) "0 c:: :::J e en Q) 0> ro c Q) 0 (i; a. en ro "0 Q) t 0 a. ~ Q) (ij en Q) en c:: 0 a. en Q) a: status for librarians as more appropriate or beneficial. 2 The SUNY librarians sur- veyed expressed little interest in status of that kind; in 1989, only 8% indicated that this was the sort of status they would prefer. Satisfaction with Faculty Status by Type of Institution Cross-tabulations enabled the investi- gator to examine the responses of sub- groups within the sample population. The first variable studied was type of institution (see table 4). The librarians working in the medical school libraries recorded the least satis- factionGn response to every question. In 1989, a majority responded positively to only three of eight opinion questions, in contrast to the other respondents, of whom most gave positive replies to all of the questions (see table 4). The medical librarians also showed precipitous drops in rates of satisfaction in the 1989 survey. The librarians in the four-year colleges showed some sizable fluctuations in opinions between the surveys. Although the greatest change was an increase in satisfaction with faculty status in their libraries, most of the more obvious changes indicated a decline in positive feelings about faculty status. A respon- dent from one four-year college ex- pressed this feeling: "At our college, faculty status is a farce. [It] gives us the right to participate on committees and vote-that's it. [We have] no released time for courses or research; it must be charged to our vacation time. Yet, when it comes to promotion or renewal of con- tract, we are expected to show growth and participate on college and profes- sional committees to the same extent as [teaching] faculty." This condition of nominal faculty status appeared to be the cause of most of the dissatisfaction expressed by the librarians who partici- pated in these surveys. Among the librarians at the university centers, most of the changes of opinion between 1982 and 1989 demonstrated enhanced satisfaction with faculty sta- tus. They showed higher rates of agree- ment that faculty status is fitting for TABLE 4 RESPONSES TO OPINION QUESTIONS BY TYPE OF INSTITUTION Two-Year Colleges Four-Year Colleges Universities Graduate/Professional Schools Opinion Questions Agree Disagree Agree Disagree Agree Disagree Agree Disagree (Short Title) 1982 1989 1982 1989 1982 1989 1982 1989 1982 1989 1982 1989 1982 1989 1982 1989 Is faculty status fitting? 86 (19) 93 {13) 5 {1) 7 {1) 94 {16) 76 {13) 6 {1) 24 {4) 84 {43) 87 {39) 14 {7) 13 (6) 93 {13) 42 {5) 7 {1) 50 {6) Satisfied with faculty status in your library? 86 {19) 93 {13) 14 {3) 0 {0) 47 {8) 76 {13) 53 {9) 24 {4) 61 {31) 71 {32) 39 {20) 29 {13) 86 {12) 42 {5) 14 {2) 33 {4) Do benefits of faculty status outweigh costs? 82 {18) 86 {12) 9 {2) 7 {1) 65 {11) 59 {10} 29 (5) 35 {6) 61 {31) 69 {31) 35 {18) 24 {11) 64 {9) 42 {5) 29 {4) 42 {5) Does faculty status enrich careers? X 100 {14) X 0 {0) X 65 {11) X 29 {5) X 87 {39) X 11 {5) X 58 {7) X 42 {5) Feel like faculty? 95 {21) 86 {12) 0 {0) 7 {1) 82 {14) 82 {14) 18 {3) 18 {3) 73 {37) 82 {37) 24 {12) 16 {7) 79 {11) 67 {8) 21 {3) 25 {3) Satisfied with ACRL criteria? 68 {15) 93 {13) 0 {0) 0 {0) 82 {14) 88 {15) 12 {2) 0 {0) 78 {40) 80 {36) 4 {2) 13 {6) 71 {10) 67 {8) 7 {1) 8 {1) Has faculty status upgraded profession? 95 {21) X 5 {1) X 59 {10) X 41 {7) X 73 {37) X 25 {13) X 79 {11) X 14 {2) X Should librarians strive for equity? 73 {16) 93 {13) 9 {2) 0 {0) 76 {13) 53 {9) 18 {3) 47 {8) 61 {31) 51 {23) 33 {17) 36{16) 71 {10) 50 {6) 14 {2) 33 {4) Prefer academic faculty status? 95 (21) 93 (13) 5 {1) 7 {1) 65 (11) 53 .{9) 24 {4) 47 (8) 61 {31) 67 (30) 31 (16) 29{13) 57 {8) 42 (5) 29 {4) 42 (5) {N)= (22) (14) {22) {14) {17) {17) {17) {17) (51) {45) (51) {45) {14) {12) {14) {12) Responses are reported as percentages rounded to the nearest whole number. Because of space limitations, tabulations for the "no response" and "can't decide" categories are not included. Opinion Questions (Short Title) Is faculty status fitting? Satisfied with faculty status in your library? Do benefits of faculty status outweigh costs? Does faculty status enrich careers? Feel like faculty? Has faculty status upgraded profession? Should librarians strive for equity? Prefer academic faculty status? (N)= TABLE SA RESPONSES TO OPINION QUESTIONS BY ACADEMIC RANK Librarian Ranks Professorial Ranks Agree Disagree Agree Disagree 1982 1989 1982 1989 1982* 1989 1982* 1989 88 (73) 77 (59) 11 (9) 21 (16) 86 (18) 90 (9) 5 (1) 10 (1) 63 (52) 68 (51) 37 (31) 28 (21) 86 (18) 100 (10) 14 (3) 0 (0) 61 (51) 64 (48) 34 (28) 28 (21) 86 (18) 80 (8) 5 (1) 10 (1) X 77 (58) X 20 (15) X 100 (10) X 0 (0) 76 (63) 80 (60) 22 (18) 17 (13) 95 (20) 90 (9) 0 (0) 10 (1) 71 (59) X 27 (22) X 95 (20) X 5 (1) X 64 (53) 53 (40) 28 (23) 37 (28) 81 (17) 90 (9) 5 (1) 0 (0) 61 (51) 60 (45) 39 (32) 37 (28) 95 (20) 1 00 (1 0) 5 (1) 0 (0) (83) (75) (83) (75) (21) (10) (21) (10) *Non-librarian ranks, most of which are presumed to be professorial Responses are reported as percentages rounded to the nearest whole number Because of space limitations, tabulations for the "no response" and "can't decide categories are not included. TABLE 58 RESPONSES TO OPINION QUESTIONS BY PROMOTION HISTORY Percent Giving Favorable Responses Successful Unsuccessful Mixed Doesn't Apply 1982 1989 1982 1989 1982 1989 1982 1989 85 (33) 86 (36) 100 (4) 67 (4) 77 (10) 40 (2) 91 (42) 86 (25) 67 (26) 79 (33) 75 (3) 50 (3) 54 (7) 40 (2) 72 (33) 69 (20) 67 (26) 79 (33) 75 (3) 33 (2) 69 (9) 80 (4) 67 (31) 62 (18) X 90 (38) X 50 (3) X 80 (4) X 76 (22) 85 (33) 86 (36) 100 (4) 50 (3) 85 (11) 80 (4) 74 (34) 79 (23) 74 (29) X 75 (3) X 77 (10) X 76 (35) X 69 (27) 67 (28) 75 (3) 67 (4) 69 (9) 20 (1) 65 (30) 52 (15) 74 (29) 76 (32) 75 (3) 67 (4) 85 (11) 40 (2) 57 (26) 59 (17) (39) (42) (4) (6) (13) (5) (46) (29) Successful: All attempts successful Unsuccessful: All attempts unsuccessful Mixed: One or more successful attempts and one or more unsuccessful attempts Doesn't Apply: Promotion not attempted TABLE 6 RESPONSES TO OPINION QUESTIONS BY LIBRARIANS' PRIMARY AREA OF RESPONSIBILITY Reference/ Collection Development Administration/Supervision Technical Services Other Services Opinion Questions Agree Disagree Agree Disagree Agree Disagree Agree Disagree (Short Title) 1982 1989 1982 1989 1982 1989 1982 1989 1982 1989 1982 1989 1982 1989 1982 1989 Is faculty status fitting? 84 (47) 79 (26) 13 (7) 21 (7) 93 (14) 93 (14) 0 (0) 7 (1} 85 (17) 87 (20) 15 (3) 13 (3) 100 (13) 59 (10) 0 (0) 35 (6} Satisfied with faculty status in your library? 63 (35) 76 (25) 38 (21) 24 (8) 80 (12) 93 (14) 20 (3) 7 (1) 65 (13) 74 (17) 35 (7) 22 (5) 77 (10) 53 (9) 23 (3) 12 (2) Do benefits of faculty status outweigh costs? 68 (38) 61 (20) 23 (13) 30 (10) 73 (11) 93 (14) 20 (3) 0 (0) 50 (10) 65 (15) 50 (10) 30 (7) 54 (7) 53 (9) 46 (6) 35 (6) Does faculty status enrich careers? X 82 (27) X 18 (6) X 100 (15) X 0 (0) X 78 (18) X 17 (4) X 65 (11) X 29 (5) Feel like faculty? 79 (44) 79 (26) 20 (11) 18 (6) 87 (13) 93 (14) 7 (1) 7 (1) 80 (16) 78 (18) 15 (3) 17 (4) 77 (10) 76 (13) 23 (3) 18 (3) Has faculty status upgraded profession? 79 (44) X 20 (11) X 80 (12) X 20 (3) X 70 (14) X 25 (5) X 69 (9) X 31 (4) X Should librarians strive for equity? 64 (36) 61 (20) 23 (13) 33 (11) 80 (12) 73 (11) 0 (0) 13 (2) 60 (12) 61 (14} 40 (8) 35 (8) 77 (10)" 35 (6) 23 (3) 41 (7) Prefer academic faculty status? 68 (38) 67 (22) 32 (18) 33 (11) 73 (11) 87 (13) 27 (4) 7 (1) 65 (13) 61 (14) 35 (7) 39 (9) 69 (9) 47 (8) 31 (4) 41 (7) (N)= (56) (33) (56) (33) (15) (15) (15) (15) (20) (23) (20) (23) (13) (17) (13) (17) Responses are reported as percentages rounded to the nearest whole number. Because of space limitations, tabulations for the "no response" and "can't decide" categories are not included. Librarians' Satisfaction with Faculty Status 545 librarians and that it enriches the careers of academic librarians. They also ex- pressed increased satisfaction with fac- ulty status in their libraries. The participants from the two-year colleges reported the highest levels of satisfaction in response to all of the ques- tions in 1989 and to most of them in 1982. This result correlated with the findings of an earlier survey, published in 1983, of conditions of faculty status in 188 public and private academic libraries in the state of New York.3 That study, conducted by this investigator and two collaborators, found that the two-year colleges had the best record of compliance with the ACRL Standards for Faculty Status for College and University Librarians (ACRL Standards).4 Although type of institution appeared to be the most significant variable among those examined in the longitudinal study (1982 and 1989), this probably had more to do with the extent of institu- tional adherence to the ACRL Standards. The evidence provided by the findings of this investigator's three surveys on faculty status leads to the hypothesis that librarians' satisfaction with faculty status correlates with institutional com- pliance with the ACRL Standards. Satisfaction with Faculty Status by Academic Rank When responses to opinion questions were cross-tabulated with the librarians' academic ranks and titles, no consistent relation emerged between levels of ranks and levels of satisfaction. Nevertheless, respondents with professorial ranks and titles expressed greater satisfaction than respondents with librarian ranks and ti- tles (see table Sa). These results suggested a similar rela- tion between ranks and titles identical to those of the teaching faculty and the highest levels of satisfaction with faculty status. Evidence of this relation also was reported in the survey published in 1983 of 188 academic libraries referred to above.5 A factor analysis done as part of that study revealed that professorial ti- tles and academic-year appointments were among the rarest rewards of faculty status given to librarians by institutions of higher education in New York.6 That survey also found that these rewards were more often accorded to the librari- ans at the community colleges than to the librarians at the other institutions. Thus, it was probably no coincidence that the SUNY respondents at the com- munity colleges, where this benefit and other benefits were more likely to be avail- able to librarians, reported the highest lev- els of satisfaction with academic faculty status in the 1982 and 1989 surveys. Satisfaction with Faculty Status by Promotion History A cross-tabulation of the respondents' replies and their experiences as candi- dates for promotion revealed that a ma- jority of both successful and unsuccessful candidates in the 1982 survey reported satisfaction. In the 1989 survey, respon- dents who had experienced only success reported increased satisfaction with fac- ulty status, whereas the other respondents reported chiefly decreased satisfaction. Unfortunately, these results may not be significant because of the small number of unsuccessful candidates for promo- tion. It would be interesting to poll a larger population to test the implications of these findings (see table Sb). Satisfaction with Fa~ulty Status by Primary Area of Responsibility The results of this cross-tabulation showed that the respondents who iden- tified themselves as administrators or supervisors registered the strongest sup- port for faculty status (see table 6). In both surveys, a majority of technical ser- vices and reference and collection devel- opment librarians recorded high rates of affirmative replies. Among the technical services librarians, the greatest differ- ence between the 1982 and 1989 surveys was their more strongly expressed belief in 1989 that the benefits of faculty status outweigh the costs. Among the respon- dents working in reference and collec- tion development, the most noticeable change was a 13-percentage-point in- crease in satisfaction with faculty status in their libraries. In the 1982 survey, the responses of collection development li- 546 College & Research Libraries brarians were not separable from those of reference librarians. In 1989, separate tallies revealed that support for faculty status was stronger among the former than it was among the latter. Satisfaction with Faculty Status by Years of Experience The librarians with more than ten years of experience were somewhat more satisfied with faculty status than those with fewer than ten years, though a majority of the respondents favorably replied to all of the questions in 1982 and to all but one in 1989. In that exceptional case, 54% of the 1989 respondents with five to ten years of experience disagreed that the benefits of faculty status out- weigh the costs. Tenure reviews usually take place during the sixth year, so this anomaly may have been related to the timing of that event. Satisfaction with Faculty Status by Tenure Status A majority of both tenured and non- tenured participants expressed satisfac- tion in the 1982 and 1989 surveys. In general, those with tenure expressed slightly more satisfaction than did their nontenured colleagues. In response to the question "To what extent do you feel like a full-fledged member of the faculty?" Eighty-six percent of the tenured librari- ans in 1982 responded positively compared with 71% of the nontenured librarians-a difference of 15 percentage points. By 1989, however, the replies to this question by both groups were almost identical--81% of the tenured and 80% of the nontenured respondents replied affirmatively. Satisfaction with Faculty Status by Gender The differences between the responses of the male and female participants were not significant in most cases. In both sur- veys, large majorities of each group said they preferred academic faculty status, felt like faculty, believed that faculty sta- tus had upgraded the profession, and thought that faculty status enriched the careers of academic librarians. In 1989, the women showed a decrease and the November 1991 men an increase in agreement that the benefits of faculty status outweigh the costs and that librarians should strive harder for equitable status as faculty members. Changes in Collective Results between 1982 and 1989 Despite some rather sharply defined differences among some subgroups in their responses to certain questions, the changes between the collective results of the two surveys were not significant. The replies by the entire cohort to most of the questions generally showed variations of no more than two or three percentage points. There were a few exceptions, how- ever (see table 2). Higher levels of positive responses in 1989 suggested that more of the librarians were enjoying both in- creased satisfaction with faculty status in their libraries (up 15%) and growing appreciation for the benefits of faculty status (up 15%). The respondents also were more satisfied with the ACRL Stan- dards (up 18%). The latter results may very well reflect expanded recognition of the ACRL Standards as defining a sat- isfactory kind of status for college and university librarians. The evidence ... leads to the hypothe- sis that librarians' satisfaction with faculty status correlates with institu- tional compliance with the ACRL Standards. Although a large majority of the re- spondents agreed that academic status resembling that of instructional faculty is fitting for librarians, favorable responses decreased by eight percentage points in 1989. This decrease appeared to be attrib- utable to the steep decline in satisfaction reported by the medical school librarians. The respondents' degree of commitment to striving for equity declined by nine percentage points, perhaps reflecting a discernible change of opinion among some of the women respondents. Possi- bly, some respondents felt less need to work for equitable status as faculty members in 1989 than in 1982. Librarians' Satisfaction with Faculty Status 547 The latter may seem a rather unlikely explanation, but several things that could have mitigated some of the discon- tent over inequitable treatment occurred during the years between the surveys. For instance, salary inequity was ad- dressed to some extent, and librarians' pro- posals for faculty research grants began to have successful outcomes. Probably the most significant change for the largest number of librarians was a contractual benefit negotiated by the faculty union, United University Professions (UUP), that provided financial support for leaves, travel, and study.7 Such programs help rec- oncile the demands of year-round respon- sibilities for providing library services with the requirement that librarians show records of publication and other professional in- volvement as academic faculty. However, the program did not provide a definitive solution to the pervasive problem of insuffi- cient institutional support for librarians' pro- fessional and scholarly pursuits.8 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS These surveys yielded new and thought-provoking information about librarians' perceptions of faculty status. In both surveys, a substantial majority of the respondents expressed a preference for academic faculty status. An even larger majority affirmed that faculty sta- tus is appropriate for librarians and that it enriches their careers. A smaller rna jor- ity felt that librarians should continue to strive for equitable status as faculty members. Two-thirds of the participants in each survey agreed that the benefits of faculty status outweigh the costs. The highest levels of satisfaction in both surveys were expressed by admin- istrators and supervisors and by the li- brarians in the community colleges, where the conditions of faculty status tended to conform most closely with the ACRL Standards for Faculty Status for Col- lege and University Librarians. Moreover, satisfaction among the members of both groups increased during the seven years between the surveys. Support for and satisfaction with faculty status appeared to be similar, for the most part, among men and women, tenured and nontenured librarians, and those holding various aca- demic ranks. Respondents holding profes- sorial ranks and titles, however, expressed greater satisfaction with faculty status than those holding librarian ranks and titles. Years of experience seemed to have little effect on satisfaction. This author offered the hypothesis that librarians' satisfaction with faculty status correlates with institutional com- pliance with the ACRL Standards. Librar- ians who are expected to do research, publish, participate in college or univer- sity governance, and take active roles in professional organizations must be allot- ted adequate time and other resources to meet these professional requirements. This author encourages others to rep- licate these studies or to conduct similar studies and suggests that they poll larger and broader-based populations. Such surveys should elicit specific reasons for the respondents' opinions. Surveys in- cluding questions about librarians' satis- faction as well as questions about the degree to which the respondents' institu- tions observe the ACRL Standards would test the hypothesis offered here. Studies investigating whether insufficient institu- tional support is responsible for librarians' negative or ambivalent feelings about fac- ulty status also would be useful. REFERENCES AND NOTES 1. Janet Krompart and Clara DiFelice, "A Review of Faculty Status Surveys, 1971-1984," Journal of Academic Librarianship 13:14-18 (Mar. 1987). 2. The following article refers to some of these authors, such as Lance Query and John DePew, who have advocated a unique status for librarians: Emily Werrell and Laura Sullivan, "Faculty Status for Academic Librarians: A Review of the Literature," College & Research Libraries 48:95-103 (Mar. 1987). The following article describes a nonfaculty academic status used at a small college to accommodate employees, such as librarians and coaches, who are not part of the tenure-track faculty, but whose duties are not 548 College & Research Libraries November 1991 administrative or clerical: Joan M. Bechtel, "Academic Professional Status: An Alter- native for Librarians, Journal of Academic Librarianship 11:289-92·(Nov. 1985). 3. Marjorie A. Benedict, Jacquelyn A. Gavryck, and Hanan C. Selvin, "Status of Academic I Librarians in New York State," College & Research Libraries 44:12-19 (Jan. 1983). 4. Association of College and Research Libraries, "Standards for Faculty Status for 1 College and University Librarians," College & Research Libraries News 33:210-12 (Sept. .I 1972). 5. Benedict, Gavryck, and Selvin, "Status of Academic Librarians," p.17-18. 6. Thomas G. English reported similar findings in "Administrators' Views of Library Personnel Status," College & Research Libraries 45:189-95 (May 1984). His survey of 47 Association of Research Libraries (ARL) member institutions found that two of the three least reported benefits and privileges of faculty status were possession of faculty ranks and the option of nine-month appointment. 7. UUP represents most of the respondents. Exceptions are those from community colleges and most library directors. 8. Others also have noted this problem. See, for example, Darrell L. Jenkins, M. Kathleen Cook, and Mary Anne Fox, "Research Development of Academic Librarians: One University's Approach," Journal of Academic Librarianship 7:83-86 (May 1981), which stated that a lack of administrative support was typical, even in libraries where research is required for professional advancement. Library policies are "exemplified by the failure to provide released time, clerical assistance, and funding in adequate amounts." OCLC/AMIGOS Collection Analysis Systems Make a wise investment. Choose from three options to analyze your library's data: Collection Analysis CD compares quantitative data BCL3 Tape Match measures against a standard Tape Analysis fits individual specifications Available exclusively from AMIGOS Bibliogra phic Council, Inc . 12200 Park Central Drive, Su ite 500 Dallas, Texas 75251 214/851-8000 or 800/843-8482