ACRL News Issue (B) of College & Research Libraries


In this issue:

ACRL Board of Directors Highlights 
of the 1975 Midwinter Meeting . 69

Current C om m en ts............................70
Inside W ash in gton ............................ 73
News From the Field . . . . 76
Guidelines for ACRL Chapters 89
P e o p l e ............................................. 90
Universal Gift Form and Instructions 95 
Draft Statement on the Reproduc­

tion of Manuscripts and Archives 
for Commercial Purposes… 96

Classified Advertising . . . .  97

ISSN 0010-0870

COLLEGE 
& RESEARCH

LIBRARIES

NO. 3 • MARCH 1975

news

ACRL Board of Directors—Highlights 
of  the 1975 Midwinter Meeting

The Board of Directors of the Association of
College and Research Libraries took the follow­
ing actions during its two Midwinter meetings, 
held in Chicago on January 20 and 23, 1975.

Approved a proposal presented by the Rare 
Books and Manuscripts Section Committee 
on Manuscripts Collections, to prepare a ma­
jor exhibit, to be opened in Chicago in July 
1976, of original and contemporary historical 
manuscripts, documents, and printed materi­
als to commemorate the 200th anniversary 
of the United States. [Note: The ALA Ex­
ecutive Board enthusiastically supported this 
proposal.]

Voted to copyright College & Research Li­
braries and College & Research Libraries 
News. [Note: In each issue the following 
statement will appear: “All material in this 
journal subject to copyright by the American 
Library Association may be photocopied for 
the noncommercial purpose of scientific or 
educational advancement.”]

Approved the recommendations of the ACRL 
Committee on Legislation, that ACRL work 
to change the Higher Education Act of 1965 
so that (1) the $5,000 basic grants, supple­
mental grants, and special purpose grants un­
der HEA II-A be available only to colleges 
having a total library materials budget of not
more than $_____and less than $_____per
student [figures to be supplied following 
analysis of U.S. Office of Education statis­
tics]; and (2) the Higher Education Act of

1965 be expanded to include a provision 
similar to the Library Partnership Act but 
based on a per capita grant formula similar
to HEFA or LSCA I for a total of $ ___
which would make funds available to institu­
tions of higher education for the purchase of 
library materials and the development of re­
source-sharing programs to provide better li­
brary services at the local, regional, and state 
level [figures to be supplied].

Approved as policy the following statement: 
“The master’s degree in library science from 
a library school accredited by the American 
Library Association is the appropriate termi­
nal professional degree for academic librari­
ans.”

Reaffirmed the American Library Associa­
tion’s endorsement of the American Associa­
tion of University Professors’ 1940 Statement 
of Principles on Academic Freedom and 
Tenure, and directed the ACRL executive 
secretary, on behalf of the president and the 
Board of Directors, to communicate this re­
affirmation to AAUP.

Received a report from Jasper G. Schad, chair­
man of the ACRL Committee on Standards 
and Accreditation, concerning the “Draft: 
Guidelines for Branch Libraries in Colleges 
and Universities” and the “Draft: Standards 
for College Libraries, 1975 Revision,” pub­
lished in the December 1974 issue of CirRL 
News. The chairman also reported that the 
committee “has reviewed the report of the 

(Continued on page 71)

News Issue (A) of College & Research Libraries, vol. 36, no. 2



the traditional Weltanschauung of many aca­
demic library administrators, the self-limiting 
attitudes of many individual librarians as noted 
above, or the traditional library bureaucracy.

In  the spring of 1974, a library faculty devel­
opment plan was approved by the university 
administration at the University of Oregon 
whose early results seem very promising in 
terms of stimulating individual effort through 
the opportunities provided by a more profes­
sional working environment. Before presenting 
a brief description of the program, it should be 
noted that professional librarians at the Univer­
sity of Oregon have had full faculty status, in­
cluding professorial titles, since 1930. However, 
total salary parity, i.e., no member of the li­
brary faculty paid less than the minimum salary 
for his/her rank according to the faculty pay 
scale, has only been completely achieved within 
the past two years.

The proposal submitted to the university was 
quite simple, and its major selling point was 
probably the fact that no additional funding 
was required to put the program into opera­
tion. It simply asked that the nine-month con­
tract option be opened to library faculty upon 
request on an ad hoc basis, or as a permanent 
condition of employment. In all cases, the full 
twelve-month salary will remain in the library 
budget and be used to hire recent graduates of 
professional schools to replace those members 
of the faculty temporarily on leave. These indi­
viduals will be brought into the library as post­
graduate fellows. In addition to their profes­
sional assignments, they will be required to 
participate in four seminars involving current 
issues in academic librarianship along with oth­
er members of the library faculty.

Although the nine-month academic contract 
is an available option, the choice of all those 
participating in the program to date has been 
a quarter leave of absence without pay. There 
are several reasons for this. First of all, there 
are slight monetary advantages for the individ­
ual in going the route of a leave without pay. 
Secondly, the leave allows the individual to ac­
cumulate vacation which can be used to reduce 
the out-of-pocket costs of a quarter off. Finally, 
the leave of absence is much simpler to admin­
ister because of the differences in appointments 
and termination dates of fiscal and academic 
contracts.

The program went into effect on July 1, 
1974. To date, there have been five applicants. 
During summer session 1974, the head of Inter- 
library Loan worked as a volunteer in a univer­
sity library in Göttingen while engaged in an in­
tensive program to master the German lan­
guage. The head of the Map Collection has re­
quested leave for the spring quarter 1975 to 
begin editing for publication the manuscripts 
and field notebooks of several prominent, early 
Northwest botanists. The head of the Slide Col­

lection left on February 1, 1975, for a four- 
month stint as librarian on the Chapman Col­
lege Floating University of the World. The as­
sistant head of the science library will be 
spending summer session 1975 working on a 
biographical directory for a discipline where no 
such tool now exists. Finally, the Japanese cata- 
loger will be using the spring quarter of 1975 
to complete a master’s degree in linguistics. Of 
the five participants to date, three are tenured, 
two are not.

Whether or not this initial burst of enthusi­
asm has exhausted the reservoir of pent-up pro­
fessional energy still remains to be seen. How­
ever, this much can be said. The response to 
the program thus far by the library faculty has 
sent shivers of approval throughout the univer­
sity administration. In addition, its implications 
over the long run have not been lost on some 
of those members of the university faculty who 
have not been totally at ease with full faculty 
status for university librarians, in spite of the 
fact that this has been a reality at Oregon for 
over forty years. Nor have they been ignored 
by the library faculty itself who realize that the 
Committee on Promotion, Tenure and Achieve­
ment will not be very sympathetic to individ­
uals coming up for promotion and tenure who 
have not taken advantage of the opportunities 
for professional development which the pro­
gram offers. No claim is made that the program 
has or will, in and of itself, bring the responsi­
bilities of full faculty status and the opportuni­
ties to meet them closer together. However, it 
does appear to be a step in the right direction.

Midwinter
(Continued -from page 69)

ARL/ACRL Task Force on University Li­
brary Standards and reaffirms the need to 
continue the development of standards for 
university libraries in institutions which grant 
more than ten doctoral degrees per year.”

Supported the concept of public ownership of 
the public papers of major government offi­
cials, but voted to defer action on a policy 
statement on the subject, which had been 
presented by the Rare Books and Manu­
scripts Section Committee on Manuscripts 
Collections, in order to consider more ex­
tensively the specific language of the state­
ment.

Approved as a draft for publication in CirRL 
News the “Statement on the Reproduction 
of Manuscripts and Archives for Commercial 
Purposes,” prepared by the RBMS Commit­
tee on Manuscripts Collections and approved 
by the Rare Books and Manuscripts Section. 
[Note: See p. 94 of this issue.]

Approved as policy the “Universal Gift Form

71



and Instructions,” prepared by the RBMS 
Committee on Manuscripts Collections and 
approved by the Rare Books and Manu­
scripts Section. [Note: See p. 93 of this is­
sue.]

Supported the efforts of the Western European 
Language Specialists Discussion Group to 
meet with representatives of the Modern 
Language Association to establish communi­
cation and to identify funding priorities for 
the New Research Tools Program of the Na­
tional Endowment for the Humanities. 
[Note: The ALA Executive Board also sup­
ported these efforts.]

Supported for a J. Morris Jones—World Book 
Encyclopedia—ALA Goals Award a proposal 
presented by the Committee on Academic 
Status, to prepare a series of audio and video 
materials on a range of issues influencing the 
role and status of librarians in postsecondary 
institutions.

Directed the Committee on Academic Status 
to develop an instrument for a salary survey 
of academic librarians in the United States 
and to work in concert with the ACRL office 
and other appropriate agencies to conduct 
such a survey at regular specified intervals 
according to the guidelines presented by the 
committee.

E ndorsed the efforts of the College Libraries 
Section to write a proposal for a study of col­
lege library problems.

Continued to support the Slavic and East 
European Section in its work to revise and 
update the Library of Congress classification 
schedules and subject heading list pertaining 
to the Soviet Union, Eastern Europe, and the 
Balkan Peninsula; but voted to defer action 
on a specific proposal presented by the Slavic 
and East European Subject Headings and 
Classification Committee.

Approved a proposal for a summer study pro­
gram for librarians in colleges and universi­
ties whose students are predominantly of 
ethnic minorities.

Supported for a J. Morris Jones—World Book 
Encyclopedia—ALA Goals Award, at a re­
vised budget level, a proposal presented by 
Louise Giles, ACRL vice-president, to devel­
op an ethnic theme for the ALA centennial 
celebration.

Granted chapter status to a group of academic 
librarians from western New York.

Approved a statement on “Guidelines for 
ACRL Chapters,” prepared by the ACRL 
Ad Hoc Committee on Chapter Develop­
ment. [Note: See p. 89 of this issue.]

Voted to establish a permanent ACRL Chap­
ters Committee, to provide assistance in the 
formation of chapters; to improve the rela­
tionship between the chapters and ACRL 
and thus between academic librarians and 
the national organization; to conduct an an­
nual survey of chapters and to compile in­
formation for the benefit of all chapters in or­
der to promote the exchange of information; 
and to develop programs for encouraging 
membership in ACRL.

E ndorsed the concept of an ACRL member­
ship promotion plan as presented by the Ad 
Hoc Committee on Chapter Development.

Acknowledged the appointment of the new 
editor of CírRL News, Mary Frances Col­
lins, and of the new associate News editor, 
Anne Dowling.

Approved the recommendations of the ACRL 
San Francisco Conference Program Planning 
Committee, concerning the allocation of 
funds for ACRL’s programs at the 1975 An­
nual Conference. The funds will be used to 
support the divisional program and programs 
of the Agriculture and Biological Sciences 
Section, the Anthropology Section, the Art 
Section, the Asian and African Section, the 
Education and Behavioral Sciences Section, 
and the Slavic and East European Section.

Heard a report from H. William Axford, 
ACRL president, concerning (1) the transi­
tional period resulting from the new ALA 
dues schedule, the role of COPES, and the 
recent survey predicting a decline in division 
memberships; (2) the role of the ACRL ex­
ecutive secretary in relation to ACRL and to 
ALA and in determining policy; (3) the 
roles and functions of College & Research 
Libraries and C&RL News; (4) the pro­
posed formula for the distribution of ALA or­
ganizational membership dues; and (5) an 
identification of ACRL’s general concerns for 
the future.

Authorized the ACRL vice-president, the 
ACRL executive secretary, and the ACRL 
Budget and Finance Committee to prepare 
the 1975/76 ACRL budget, for approval by 
a mail vote of the Board of Directors before 
April 15, 1975.

Approved the recommendation of the Com­
mittee on Academic Status, that the 1975/76 
ACRL budget include provision for at least 
one half-time professional assistant to handle 
problems relating to faculty status.

Heard a report from Richard K. Gardner, edi­
tor of Choice, concerning an assessment to 
Choice by ALA for indirect overhead costs.

■ ■

72