College and Research Libraries


Review Articles 
The Status of Librarians 
The Status of American College and Univer-

sity Librarians. Edited by Robert B. Downs. 
Chicago: American Library Association, 
1958. 184p. $3.50. ( A C R L Monograph 
Number 22.) 

One is certainly grateful to Dr. Downs 
and the A C R L monograph editors for col-
lecting into one volume the most important 
professional writings on the status of col-
lege and university librarians which have 
appeared in the postwar period (with the 
exception of Robert W . McEwen's " T h e 
Status of College Librarians" which was pub-
lished in College and Research Libraries in 
J u n e 1942 and which is included). Dr. 
Downs has had a further happy thought 
which can be best explained in the words 
of his own preface: "Because the present 
monograph's chief aim is to provide prac-
tical assistance to librarians and institutions 
struggling with matters of status, it was de-
cided to arrange the group of papers in re-
verse chronological order. Ordinarily, the 
recent data are being sought, and therefore 
it may be a convenience for readers to be-
gin with the most up-to-date findings. . . ." 

What is the status of the college and uni-
versity librarian in America today? Are col-
lege and university librarians affiliated with 
the faculty? Do they have comparable or 
equivalent status with respect to voice and 
vote in faculty meetings, participation in 
academic functions, salary, tenure, sick leave, 
retirement, and sabbaticals, and are they 
thought of as being a part of the faculty 
group? A partial answer at least is supplied 
by comparing three general studies (gen-
eral as applying to many institutions and as 
opposed to the study of a particular library 
personnel program) included in this A C R L 
monograph: Gelfand's 1949 survey of library 
staffs in fifty eastern liberal arts colleges, 
Lundy's 1951 study of faculty status for li-
brarians in thirty-five representative univer-
sities, and Downs's 1957 survey, the most 
recent of its kind, of the current status of 
library staffs in 115 major universities. In 
1949, Gelfand's picture of the librarian in 

the academic community of fifty eastern lib-
eral arts colleges showed that faculty rank 
and status was accorded to 24 per cent of 
this group, although 72 per cent of the chief 
librarians held rank. In 1951, Lundy's study 
of thirty-five universities revealed that 40 
per cent of the group clearly identified the 
library staff with the teaching and research 
staff. Another 20 per cent had accepted 
librarians into the faculty with various res-
ervations and limitations, and about 40 per 
cent either regarded librarians as a special 
professional group or else had found no 
solution as to the best method for recog-
nizing the work of professional librarians. 
Dr. Downs's 1957 survey of librarian status 
in 115 leading universities shows that 54 per 
cent of the universities grant faculty status 
to librarians, with or without specific faculty 
ranking. In 35 per cent of the universities, 
the librarians are regarded as a separate 
professional group or they may be part of 
the administrative-employee class. Signifi-
cantly, Downs notes that in 11 per cent of 
the total, in publicly controlled institutions, 
the librarians came under civil service reg-
ulations, although some of the top-ranking 
staff members in this group are exempted 
from civil service. Glaciers move faster than 
faculty status for librarians but it is evident 
in these general surveys extending from 1949 
to 1957 (more evident if one goes back to 
the McMillen study of 1940) that the trend 
is in the direction of giving librarians full 
academic status with most of the rights and 
privileges of faculty members. It is also 
clear that the conditions of work and the 
amount of responsibility attached to various 
stages in the two professions are too differ-
ent to allow of precise assimilation. Thus 
librarians who are normally identified with 
the faculty of a university rarely receive 
identically the same salaries, the same vaca-
tions, or precisely the same sabbatical privi-
lege as other faculty members. Neither do 
all librarians agree that staff members must 
have faculty rank and titles to maintain a 
position of dignity and importance on the 
campus. Nevertheless, in spite of the diver-
sity of opinion on the matter of desirability 
of such status, even among librarians, the 

160 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH L I B R A R I E S -



fact is that more and more colleges and uni-
versities are identifying their library staffs 
with the academic group. It is Dr. Downs's 
firm conviction that over the years the full 
identification of librarians with the faculty, 
with all the rights and privileges which this 
status implies, will create the best kind of 
library service to students and faculty. And, 
of course, he is fundamentally right. In time 
the second class status and/or "separate but 
equal" status will eventually become anom-
alous. This is not to suggest that every head 
librarian or professional library staff that 
has not yet reached faculty status should 
rush headlong into the battle, armed with 
copies of this report, to demand full fac-
ulty privileges. Neither should the head 
librarian or library staff that has not yet 
achieved all that Dr. Downs and others have 
in terms of status for professional librarians 
feel miserable, downcast, and frustrated. T o o 
much preoccupation with staff status leads 
to fancied grievances, to dulling the imag-
ination, and to the forming of a hard de-
fensive crust on the mind which results in 
inflexibility. Dr. Downs and his contributors 
say clearly what must be done to achieve 
a satisfactory staff status. If conditions at 
Illinois and elsewhere seem somewhat re-
mote from one's present situation, be of 
good cheer because if one has imagination, 
if he has a clear-cut conception of the li-
brary's role in the college or university, if 
he takes every reasonable opportunity to 
make known the nature and importance of 
this role, and if in public performance and 
personal conviction he measures library suc-
cess in terms of quality rather than quan-
tity, then in good time all librarians—from 
the head librarian to the beginning profes-
sional librarian—will be accepted fully as 
members of the instructional or academic 
staff of the college or university. 

As every good compiler should, Dr. Downs 
introduces the authors and pages contained 
in this monograph by precise reference to 
the source of the maiden publication, and 
also summarizes the major points or purpose 
of each contribution. Apparently all but 
two of the articles have been previously 
published. They include Paul H. Buck's "A 
New Personnel Program for Harvard Li-
brarians," Patricia Knapp's " T h e College 
Librarian: Sociology of a Professional Spe-

cialization," William H. Carlson's " T h e 
T r e n d Toward Academic Recognition of 
College Librarians," Robert H. Muller's 
"Faculty Rank for Library Staff Members 
in Medium-Sized Universities and Colleges," 
Felix Reichmann's "Hercules and Antaeus," 
Lawrence Thompson's "Preparation and Sta-
tus of Personnel," Sidney H. Ditzion's "Col-
lege Librarians and the Higher Learning," 
the Lundy and Gelfand studies previously 
mentioned in this review, and three contri-
butions by the editor himself. Lewis C. 
Branscomb's " T h e Quest for Faculty R a n k " 
(that title gives me a haunting sense of ex-

ile from a passionate paradise) and Rob-
ert M. Pierson and Howard Rovelstadt's 
" T h e Case of Faculty Status for Librarians" 
appear here for the first time in public print. 

T h e whole book—though perhaps, it is 
less a book than a series of papers—makes 
an eloquent appeal on behalf of the impor-
tance of librarianship and its being highly 
regarded and intelligently rewarded by the 
institutions whom the librarians serve. One 
might hope that such a book was quite un-
necessary, but even in these days no one 
can say that it is not needed, in view of the 
amount of shallow depreciation that is cur-
rent in some places by administrators and 
faculty members who ought to know better 
—and frequently do, because in public ad-
dress they continue to refer to the library 
as "the heart of the institution." T h i s leads 
one to the optimistic conclusion that col-
leges and universities may get along without 
full recognition for librarians as faculty 
members but they cannot get along without 
libraries.—Guy R. Lyle, Emory University 
Library. 

Industrial Information 
Information and Communication Practice in 

Industry. Edited by T . E. R . Singer. New 
York: Reinhold Publishing Corp., 304p., 
$8.75. 

Present practices and services in industrial 
libraries and information departments are 
discussed in this book. T h e distinction be-
tween an industrial library and an informa-
tion department is not a sharp one. T h e in-
dustrial library which collects, abstracts, or-

MARCH 1959 161