ACRL News Issue (B) of College & Research Libraries 920 / C&RL News ■ October 2001 ACRL STANDARDS & GUIDELINES. Guidelines for Academic Status of College and University Libraries A draft Prepared by the Committee on the Status o f Academic Librarians I n 1971, ACRL a d o p te d the “Standards for Faculty Status of College and Univer­ sity Librarians” (revised 2001). ACRL supports faculty rank, status, and tenure for librarians and has developed the following docum ents in support of this concept: 1. ACRL “Guidelines and Procedures for Screening and A ppointm ent of Academic Li­ brarians” (1977). 2. ACRL/AAUP/AAC “Joint Statement on Faculty Status of College and University Li­ brarians” (1972). 3. ACRL “Model Statement of Criteria and Procedures for Appointment, Prom otion in Academic Rank, and Tenure for College and University Librarians” (1987). ACRL also has developed the following guidelines for academ ic librarians w ithout faculty status to ensure that their rights, privi­ leges, and responsibilities reflect their inte­ gral role in the mission of their institutions. 1. P r o f e s s io n a l r e s p o n s ib ilit ie s . Librar­ ians sh o u ld b e a ssig n e d resp o n sib ilitie s m atched to their educational com petencies and interests. They should have maximum latitude in fulfilling their responsibilities. Com­ mittees of their peers and supervisory per­ sonnel should regularly and vigorously re­ view their performance. Review standards and procedures sh ould be p u blished and uni­ formly applied; reviewing bodies should have access to all appropriate docum entation. 2. G o v e r n a n c e . The library exists to su p ­ port the teaching and research functions of the institution. Thus librarians should partici­ pate in the developm ent of the institution’s mission, curriculum, and governance. Librar­ ians should participate in the developm ent of policies and procedures for their institu­ tion, and in the hiring, review, retention, and continuing appointm ent of their peers. 3. C o n tr a c ts. A librarian’s appointm ent should be by w ritten contract of no less than one year. The contract should state the terms and conditions of service and grant security of em ploym ent for the contractual period. After a period of no longer than seven years, and through a process w hich includes peer review, librarians should be granted continu­ ing em ploym ent if they have m et the ap p ro ­ priate conditions and standards. 4. C o m p e n s a tio n . The salary scale and benefits for librarians should be the sam e as for other academ ic categories with equiva­ lent education, experience, or responsibility. 5. P r o m o t io n a n d sa la r y in c r e a s e s . Li­ brarians should be prom oted through ranks on the basis of their professional proficiency and effectiveness. Procedures for prom otion and salary increases should include a peer review. Librarians should have ranks equiva­ lent to those of the faculty. 6. L eaves a n d r e s e a r c h fu n d s . Librar­ ians should be eligible for internal and exter­ nal research funds, leaves of absence, sab­ baticals, and other m eans of administrative support to prom ote their active participation in research and other professional activities. 7 . A c a d e m ic f r e e d o m . Librarians are en titled to th e p ro te c tio n o f academ ic free­ do m as set forth in th e A m erican A ssocia­ tion of University Professors 1940 Statement C&RL News ■ October 2001 / 921 o f Principles o n A cadem ic F reedom and Tenure. 8 . D is m is s a l o r n o n r e a p p o i n t m e n t . The institution may dismiss a librarian during the contractual period only for just cause and through academic due process. Nonreappoint­ m ent should involve adequate notice, peer review, and access to a grievance procedure. 9- G riev a n ce . Librarians should have ac­ cess to grievance procedures. These should include steps to be com pleted within speci­ fied tim e limits a n d effective safeguards against reprisal by the institution or abuse of the procedures by the grievant. They must b e consistent w ith applicable institutional regulations and contracts. D evelopm ent and revision o f the g u id e lin e s In January 2000, the Standards and Accredita­ tion Committee (SAC) referred two documents to the Committee on the Status of Academic Librarians for revision: “Standards for Faculty Status of College and University Librarians” and “Guidelines for Academic Status of Col­ lege and University Libraries.” SAC also asked that consideration be given to combining the two documents. After much discussion, it was concluded that the documents should remain separate, primarily because: 1) they address entirely different issues and it would cause confusion to combine the concepts into a single docu­ ment; 2) it w ould w eaken the argument for im provem ent at those institutions that do award limited faculty status to librarians; and 3) librarians at institutions with no hope of faculty status w ould have no clear guidelines to support improvement within their status. The “Standards for Faculty Status of Col­ lege and University Librarians” w ent through the revision process, was approved at Mid­ winter 2001, and the final version was pub­ lished in the March 2001 C&RL News. T he present “Guidelines for Academic Status of College and University Librarians,” p u b lish e d in 1990, w e re revised at the committee’s meeting in June 2001. The com ­ mittee is seeking input on this draft through postings to electronic discussion lists, via e- mail to Bill Nelson (wnelson@aug.edu), and in a public forum. The Committee on the Status of Academic Librarians will be conducting an open hear­ ing at the upcoming ALA Midwinter Meeting in New Orleans to solicit input from the mem­ bership on these changes and to address your concerns with the guidelines. Comments will be incorporated into the final document, which will be presented to SAC for recommendation of final approval by ACRL and ALA. Committee members past and present who have worked on this document include: Navjit Brar, Martín Goldberg, Phillip Jones, Sharon McCaslin, Bill Nelson, Samson Soong, Anita Talar, and G lenda Thornton; and interns James Chervinko, Valerie Feinman, and Revil Veli. ■ ( “Charlotte . . c o n tin u ed fr o m p a g e 918) • D a v id s o n C o lle g e (Davidson, North Carolina): http://w w w .davidson.edu • D u k e U n iv e r sity (Durham, North Caro­ lina): http://w w w .duke.edu • F u r m a n U n iv e r s ity (Greenville, South Carolina): http://w w w .furm an.edu • Q u e en ’s C o lleg e (Charlotte, North Caro­ lina): http://w w w .queens.edu • U n i v e r s i t y o f N o r t h C a r o lin a a t C h a p e l H ill (Chapel Hill, North Carolina): http://w w w .unc.edu • U n iv e r sity o f N o r th C a ro lin a at C har­ lo t t e (C harlotte, N orth Carolina): h ttp :// w w w .uncc.edu • C en tra l P ie d m o n t C o m m u n ity C ol­ le g e (Charlotte, North Carolina): http://w w w . cpcc.cc.nc.us H e a d in g o u t o f C h a rlo tte Charlotte enjoys excellent highway accessi­ bility to attractions further afield. Interstates 77 and 85 intersect in Charlotte, linking the city with the Great Lakes Region, New En­ gland, a n d Florida. Interstate 40, running coast-to-coast across the United States, is only an hour north of Charlotte. The Great Smoky Mountains are only two hours to the w est of Charlotte, and the Atlan­ tic Coast beaches are a bit over three hours to the east. Some of the world’s best golf courses are only an h o u r’s drive east of Charlotte. ■ mailto:wnelson@aug.edu http://www.davidson.edu http://www.duke.edu http://www.furman.edu http://www.queens.edu http://www.unc.edu http://www.uncc.edu