scholarly journals CUNY Librarians and Faculty Status: Past, Present, and Future

2014 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
John Drobnicki
Keyword(s):  
Faculty Status

scholarly journals Typology of Librarian Status Created for U.S. Land Grant Universities is Applicable to U.S. Research Libraries

2009 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 60
Author(s):  
Kate Kelly
Keyword(s):  
Research Universities ◽  
Land Grant ◽  
Tenure Track ◽  
Land Grant Universities ◽  
Research Libraries ◽  
The Status ◽  
Type 3 ◽  
Faculty Status

Bolin, Mary K. “Librarian Status at U.S. Research Universities: Extending the Typology.” Journal of Academic Librarianship 34.5 (August 2008): 416-24. Objective – To describe and categorize the status of librarians at 119 American research libraries using a typology of librarian status first developed for 50 U.S. land grant universities. Design – Survey. Setting – U.S. research universities. Subjects – 119 American research universities. Included are those universities whose library is a member of the Association of Research Libraries (ARL), in addition to land grant universities who are not also ARL members, and any flagship state universities who are neither ARL nor land grant universities. All subjects are classified as either “research – very high” or “research – high” in the Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education. The 119 institutions represent a total census of the selected population. Methods – The websites of the 119 institutions were surveyed and data on institutional characteristics such as governance, size and geography collected. Additionally, data describing librarian status characteristics such as administrator title, rank systems and tenure status was gathered from sources such as promotion and tenure documentation, faculty handbooks, and policy manuals available on websites. Data was compiled on a spreadsheet and imported into SPSS which was used to create frequencies and cross tabulations. Data was categorised and cross-tabulated using a typology of status originally applied to 50 land grant universities in a previous study. The typology comprises four possible status types for librarians: Type 1 – Faculty: Professorial ranks. Type 2 – Faculty: Other ranks with tenure. Type 3 – Faculty: Other ranks without tenure. Type 4 – Non-faculty: Professional or academic staff. Main Results – In the 119 institutions surveyed, librarians held faculty status at 74 (62%) institutions, of which 63 (51%) provided tenure track positions. At the remaining 45 (38%) institutions, librarians were considered non-faculty. Of the 50 “land grant” institutions in the population, 40 (80%) had librarians with faculty status and 35 (70%) provided tenure track. Ten universities (20%) considered librarians non-faculty. Of the 97 ARL libraries in the population, 55 (57%) had librarians with faculty status and 44 (45%) provided tenure track. Non-faculty librarians were found at 42 (43%) of these institutions. Of the 90 public institutions in the population, 68 (76%) had librarians who were faculty, 57 (64%) provided tenure track, and 22 (24%) had non-faculty librarians. Among the 29 private institutions the status ratios were reversed with only 4 (13%) institutions having librarians ranked as tenure track faculty (type 1 or type 2) and 23 (80%) having non-faculty librarians. In the total population (119) type 3 “Faculty: Other ranks without tenure” was the least common category, 48% (57) of libraries were headed by a dean, 67% (80) of institutions had librarian representation on faculty senate and as the size of an institution increased the likelihood of librarians having faculty rank decreased. “Dean” was the most popular administrator title in the population; it correlated with professorial rank and was strongly associated with tenure. Having tenure was, in turn, strongly associated with faculty senate representation. In the Northeast census region type 4, non-faculty staff predominated while type 1 was rare; in the Midwest there was an almost even split between type 1 and type 4; in the South there was a fairly even spread across all four types, and in the West a fairly even spread across types 1, 2 and 4. Finally, the data showed that as the size of an institution increased, the likelihood of librarians having faculty rank decreased. Conclusion – The typology created for land grant universities can be extended and applied to a wider population. It is valid and reliable both for organizing information about librarian status and for comparing institutions and population segments.

scholarly journals More Academic Librarians in Arkansas with Faculty Status and Rights but Decreased Benefits and Increased Responsibility

2013 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 99
Author(s):  
Mê-Linh Lê
Keyword(s):  
Response Rate ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
Academic Library ◽  
Public Institutions ◽  
Academic Librarians ◽  
Similar Data ◽  
Academic Institutions ◽  
Online Questionnaire ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
Faculty Status

A Review of: Vix, H. M., & Buckman, K. M. (2011). Academic librarians: Status, privileges, and rights. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 38(1), 20-25. doi: 10.1016/j.acalib.2011.11.004 Objective – To provide cross-comparable information on the number of students per librarian, salary, faculty status, contract lengths, and maternity benefits of academic librarians. Design – Online questionnaire. Setting – Four-year private, four-year public, and two-year public academic institutions in Arkansas. Subjects – Academic library deans and directors were surveyed three times over a six-year period. Methods – Three surveys were sent to library deans and directors of four-year private, four-year public, and two-year public academic institutions in Arkansas in 2007, 2009, and 2011. The surveys were created by the College and University Library Division of the Arkansas Library Association, with questions created based on reports from the Association of College and Research Libraries (e.g., Standards and Statements). Committee members tested the survey before distribution. Over the course of the six-year period the questions were modified and were chosen to ensure that respondents could easily answer them (i.e., no questions on topics such as retirements, vacation, which can vary significantly from librarian to librarian). All responses were confidential. Main Results – The 2007 survey had a 78% response rate (n=35/45); the 2009 survey had a 93% response rate (n=42/45); and the 2011 survey had a 90% response rate (n=44/49). While the survey covered a number of topics (shown in supplementary material online), the article focused on five areas of interests and had the following findings. 1) The number of students per librarian is increasing at four-year private and two-year public institutions. While the data shows a decrease in the ratio at four-year public institutions the authors believe this is due to the addition of new institutions in the follow-up surveys, one of which had a very low study-to-librarian ration. 2) Tenured librarians make more than non-tenured librarians. 3) The number of institutions granting faculty status is increasing at a statistically significant rate at four-year private and two-year public institutions, and has remained relatively constant at four-year public institutions. 4) Most libraries have 12-month contracts for librarians, although this has decreased slightly over the survey period. 5) The number of institutions providing paid maternity leave has decreased. Conclusion – This study provides a broad overview of the changing state of academic librarians’ rights and benefits in Arkansas over the last six years. Some of the trends demonstrated, such as an increase in the number of students per librarian, are potentially troubling and may have a negative impact on the quality of service provided by individual institutions. Other trends, such as increases in institutions granting faculty status to librarians and decreasing the number of 12-month contracts, may signal that some institutions are beginning to acknowledge the significance and impact of librarian research. Ultimately, this article provides a starting point for other states and provinces to begin collecting similar data in an attempt to understand changing trends in academic libraries.

scholarly journals Organizations Endorsing the Statement On Faculty Status

1974 ◽  
Vol 35 (5) ◽  
pp. 109-109
Author(s):  
American Library Association
Keyword(s):  
Faculty Status
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document