College and Research Libraries


M A R G O T R U M P E T E R 

Non-Librarians in the Academic Library 
This article explores some differences between a group of people 
working professionally in academic libraries who do not regard them-
selves as librarians and an individually matched group of librarians 
who do identify with the profession. The differences explored are: 
salaries, education (both professional and non-library), non-library 
associational affiliations, fulfillment of career expectations, and po-
sition classification. The results are regarded in terms of David Weber's 
article, "The Place of 'Professional Specialists' on the University 
Library Staff," ivhich appeared earlier in College and Research Li-
braries. 

T T H E R E E X I S T S within the academic 
library a discernible group of people, 
usually holding specialized jobs, who 
choose to regard themselves as belong-
ing, not to the library profession, but to 
some other profession or discipline. 
Some aspects of this group have been 
discussed by David C. Weber in his 
article "The Place of 'Professional Spe-
cialists' on the University Librarv 
Staff."1 

A current survey of the characteristics 
of academic librarians being carried out 
by Anita R. Schiller at the University 
of Illinois library research center pro-
vides an opportunity to look at this group 
of other-than-librarians more closely.2 
The Schiller study, through a systematic 
two-stage stratified probability sample, 
takes into account all professional per-
sonnel employed in academic libraries of 
all types in the United States. One out 

1 David C. Weber, " T h e Place of 'Professional Spe-
cialists' on the University Library Staff," CRL, X X V I 
(September 1 9 6 5 ) , 3 8 3 - 8 8 . 

2 Anita R. Schiller, "Characteristics of Professional 
Personnel in College and University Libraries" (un-
published research in progress at the University of 
Illinois, Library Research Center, Graduate School of 
Library Science). 

Mrs. Trumpeter is research associate, Li-
brary Research Center, Graduate School of 
Library Science, University of Illinois. 

of every five individuals so employed was 
asked to complete and return a ques-
tionnaire. There was a 92 per cent re-
sponse rate from the 2,660 sampled li-
brarians, 2,282 of whom were full-time 
workers. 

The following question from this sur-
vey provided the data for the present 
analysis of some characteristics of this 
group of "non-librarian" professionals in 
academic libraries: 

Do you regard yourself professionally as 
a: (check only one) Librarian 

Other (specify) 

In answering this question, fifty-six re-
spondents specified "other," indicating 
that they perform professional tasks in 
an academic library but do not regard 
themselves as librarians. All were full-
time salaried workers. 

These fifty-six people make up the 
principal group examined in this article 
(Group A). For comparative purposes, 
a second group was then chosen con-
sisting of fifty-six people who do re-
gard themselves professionally as librar-
ians (Group B ) . Group B subjects were 
individually matched with Group A sub-
jects for sex, age, length of contract year, 
and type, size, and control of institution 

/ 461 



462 / College <Lr Research Libraries • November 1968 

employing them. A five-year range was 
allowed for matching on the age var-
iable; on the other variables, subjects 
were identically matched. 

Since Group A consisted of thirty-
eight men and eighteen women, Group 
B had the same composition. This dis-
tribution in itself is interesting when one 
realizes that within the entire population 
of academic librarians, the ratio is ap-
proximately two women to one man. For 
those respondents who work in academic 
libraries but do not consider themselves 
as librarians, this ratio is reversed. On 
other characteristics for the two groups, 
the median age of the men was forty-
one years (ranging from twenty-five to 
sixty-seven) and of the women, forty-
three years (ranging from twenty-five to 
sixty). The majority of the subjects (68 
per cent) were employed in university 
libraries. 

For exploratory purposes the follow-
ing list of questions was devised to check 
against survey data for the two groups. 

1. Is there a significant difference in the 
salaries received? 

2. Is one group more likely to have pro-
fessional library training than the 
other? 

3. Is membership in non-library groups 
and associations more common in one 
group than the other? 

4. Is there a difference in educational 
level as measured by the highest sub-
ject degree held? 

5. Is there a difference in the way 
members of the two groups feel their 
careers have fulfilled their expecta-
tions? 

6. Are members of one group more likely 
to hold a higher position classification 
in the library than those of the other 
group? 

In order to test these questions, data 
were drawn from the larger survey on 
the following variables for the individual 
subjects of both groups: ( 1 ) salary; ( 2 ) 

library degree(s) held; ( 3 ) number of 
non-library associational affiliations; ( 4 ) 
highest subject degree held; ( 5 ) ful-
fillment of career expectations; and ( 6 ) 
library position level. 

Actual salary and the number of non-
library group affiliations were recorded 
directly from the questionnaires. Library 
degree information was regarded as di-
chotomous; the individual either did or 
did not have professional library train-
ing. The highest subject (i.e., non-li-
brary) degree held was quantified as: 
( 0 ) none, ( 1 ) bachelor's, ( 2 ) master's, 
and ( 3 ) doctorate. An ordinal scale was 
used to measure fulfillment of career ex-
pectations. It ran from one through five 
as follows: ( 1 ) very disappointing, ( 2 ) 
somewhat disappointing, ( 3 ) about as 
expected, ( 4 ) somewhat more satisfying 
than expected, and ( 5 ) much more sat-
isfying than expected. The position clas-
sification levels were coded as follows: 
( 1 ) professional assistant, ( 2 ) head of 
college, school, or departmental library, 
( 3 ) department or division head, ( 4 ) 
associate or assistant director, and ( 5 ) 
chief librarian or director. 

Appropriate statistical tests of signif-
icance were then performed in the com-
parison of the two groups. The t-test of 
difference between two means was ap-
plied to the salary information. Chi-
square was used with the dichotomous 
library degree information. Other dif-
ferences were tested for significance us-
ing the Mann-Whitney U-test. The pre-
determined level of significance was .01. 

T A B L E 1 
P R O F E S S I O N A L L I B R A R Y T R A I N I N G 

G R O U P A G R O U P B 

P e r P e r 
No. C e n t N o . Cent 

With library degree 13 24 4 4 80 
Without library 

degree 42 76 11 20 

Total 55 1 0 0 5 5 100 



Non-Librarians in the Academic Library / 463 

T A B L E 2 

M E M B E R S H I P IN N O N - L I B R A R Y A S S O C I A T I O N S 

Number belonging to no non-library 
organizations 

Number belonging to one non-
library organization 

Number belonging to two or more 
non-library organizations 

Total 

G R O U P A 

No. 

12 
1 9 

1 9 

5 0 

P e r C e n t 

2 4 

3 8 

3 8 

100 

G R O U P B 

No. 

3 3 

9 

8 

5 0 

R E S U L T S 

1. Statistically, there was no signifi-
cant difference in the salaries earned by 
members of the two groups. 

2. Subjects in Group A (those who 
consider themselves as other-than-librar-
ians) had less professional library train-
ing than Group B subjects and this dif-
ference was significant at the .01 level. 
Of the fifty-five subjects in each group 
for whom data were available, forty-four 
of those in Group B had professional li-
brary degrees, while only thirteen of 
those in Group A had such training 
(Table 1). 

3. Subjects in Group A belonged to 
more professional non-library associations 
than did Group B subjects and this dif-
ference is significant at the .01 level 
(Table 2 ) . 

4. Subjects in Group A had attained 
a higher level of education as measured 
by highest (non-library) subject degree 
earned, and this difference is significant 
at the .01 level (Table 3 ) . 

T A B L E 3 

H I G H E S T S U B J E C T D E G R E E S E A R N E D 

G R O U P A G R O U P B 

P e r P e r 
D E G R E E N o . C e n t No. C e n t 

Doctorate 8 1 4 1 1 
Master's 2 6 4 8 1 3 2 4 
Bachelor's 1 9 3 5 3 8 7 0 
None 1 1 2 3 

Total 5 4 9 8 5 4 9 8 

5. Statistically, there was no signif-
icant difference in the way subjects in 
the two groups felt their careers in aca-
demic libraries had fulfilled their expec-
tations. Those who regarded themselves 
as librarians were just as likely to be 
satisfied (or disappointed) as were those 
who denied identification with the li-
brary profession. 

6. Statistically, there was no signif-
icant difference in the position classifi-
cations held by members of the two 
groups. Individual subjects from both 
groups can be found at all position levels 
in the academic library. 

DISCUSSION 

This analysis is concerned with a 
group of fifty-six academic library pro-
fessional employees who identify them-
selves as other-than-librarians and with 
some ways in which they differ from an 
individually matched group who identify 
with the library profession. The writer 
is enough acquainted with the data bank 
from which these two groups were 
drawn to realize that there are many 
people on academic library staffs who 
could equally well qualify as profession-
al specialists but who do regard them-
selves as librarians. From survey data it 
is clear, however, that this group of fifty-
six who do not regard themselves pro-
fessionally as librarians are realistic in 
their assessment and do, in fact, differ 
in several ways from the librarian group. 

All of the fifty-six subjects have the 



464 / College <Lr Research Libraries • November 1968 

special education and previous work ex-
perience necessary to justify their identi-
fication with another professional group. 
Their occupational self-images, therefore, 
seem to be legitimate. Although a small 
proportion of the group (24 per cent) 
had library degrees, it is their other ad-
vanced degrees that form the basis for 
their difference from the professional li-
brarian group. The non-librarians had at-
tained higher levels of education as 
measured by the highest (non-library) 
subject degrees earned. In this group 
were eight subject doctorates and twen-
ty-six subject master's degrees, com-
pared to one subject doctorate and thir-
teen subject master's degrees among the 
matched group who regard themselves as 
librarians. This subject specialization 
makes all the more legitimate the 
identification which members of Group 
A claim with professions other than li-
brarianship. 

The two professions which were speci-
fied most often were audio-visual spe-
cialist and teacher. Of the eight teach-
ers, six were women. Eight of the nine 
audio-visual specialists were men. (The 
number of people from Group A who 
identify with these two professions helps 
explain the popularity of membership in 
the National Education Association as 
mentioned below.) Other examples of 
the professional identification speci-
fied by the group of non-librarians were: 
archivist, historian, subject specialist, bib-
liographer, lawyer, chemist, artist, busi-
ness manager, professor, photographic 
reproduction specialist, systems analyst, 
information scientist, and map specialist. 
This list calls to mind David Weber's 
list of "specific specialist assignments" in 
academic libraries. Weber defines a spe-
cialist as "an individual with a subject or 
technical expertise combined with a 
knowledge of libraries and educational 
institutions. . . . The term is further lim-
ited to persons whose specialist talents 
may be said to dominate his talents as 
a librarian."3 

3 Weber, op. c i t . , 3 8 3 . 

Weber seems to be describing the 
group of non-librarians studied here as 
he goes on to say that "an indication of 
the dominating interest in the specialty 
would be the individual's membership 
and activity in such associations as the 
Society of American Archivists, the Na-
tional Microfilm Association, or the Mod-
ern Language Association, and per-
haps little interest" in library associ-
ations.4 T h e present analysis shows that 
membership in non-library national as-
sociations is much more common among 
the non-librarians studied than among 
the librarians. Seventy-six per cent of 
the non-library group belong to one or 
more non-library associations while, of 
the librarians, 66 per cent do not belong 
to any non-library associations. 

The list of non-library associations to 
which the non-librarians belong is long 
and revealing. The most popular are the 
National Education Association with thir-
teen members and the American As-
sociation of University Professors with 
eleven members. (In the latter organiza-
tion, however, one can also find eight 
of the fifty-six Group B librarians.) Four 
of the non-librarian group belong to the 
Society of American Archivists and three 
to each of the following: American His-
torical Association, the Organization of 
American Historians, and the American 
Association of University Women. Rep-
resented among the remaining twenty-
seven associations specified by only one 
or two people were such groups as: the 
Renaissance Society, American Indian 
Ethnohistoric Conference, Keats-Shelley 
Association of America, the National 
Women Lawyers' Association, and the 
Society of Early Historical Archaeology. 
These less common associational affilia-
tions are further evidence of this group's 
specialist interests. 

With regard to fulfillment of career 
expectations and the position classifica-
tions held by members of the two groups, 
there is less evidence of substantial dif-
ferences. In neither case were the dif-

4 Ibid., 3 8 4 . 



Non-Librarians in the Academic Library / 465 

ferences statistically significant. No one 
from either group declared himself "very 
disappointed" with the fulfillment of his 
career expectations. Both librarians and 
non-librarians were found to cluster at 
the midpoint which indicated that their 
library careers were "about as expected." 
Individuals in both groups were found 
in all position levels. Neither group was 
represented in one position more than 
another position. 

Although the difference in salaries for 
the two groups was not found to be 
statistically significant, the professional 
significance becomes apparent when one 
recognizes the non-librarians as special-
ists. Weber suggests that a separate sal-
ary schedule is usually created because 
"the specialist is drawn from a different 
market which dictates the salary mini-
mums for different levels."5 That this is 
not always the case for those specialists 
who do not regard themselves as librari-
ans is apparent from the data. The fol-
lowing comment, appended to one ques-
tionnaire, emphasizes one notable excep-
tion: 

Librarians are notoriously underpaid. For 
that reason I switched to being a systems 
analyst. I immediately received a boost of 
25 per cent in salary with a promise of an-
other 25 per cent in two years. This, by the 
way, was done at the same institution. 

It happens that this person did have a 
library degree and had had previous 
work experience in a field allied to sys-
tems analysis. Since this is a specialty 
sought in a national market, it was fi-
nancially expedient for him to change 
his occupational image and regard him-
self professionally as something other 
than a librarian. 

T h e median salary for the non-li-

8 Ibid., 3 8 6 . 

brarians as a group, however, was 
$9,000 (mean $9,148) as compared with 
the median for the librarians which was 
$8,450 (mean $8,996). As indicated ear-
lier the majority (68 per cent) of people 
in both groups were found in university 
libraries. Of those employed in universi-
ty libraries the median salary was $9,450 
for the non-librarians and $9,100 for the 
librarians. The differences are clearly 
minor and were not statistically signif-
icant in any case. One would have to 
conclude that there are no real group 
advantages in salary for the non-li-
brarian group. 

In summary, the individuals who do 
not regard themselves professionally as 
librarians do, in fact, differ in several 
respects from their colleagues. Sig-
nificant differences can be found with 
regard to library training, non-library as-
sociational affiliations, and level of edu-
cation as measured by highest non-li-
brary subject degree held. Still, there ap-
pears to be little difference between the 
two groups with regard to salary, posi-
tion level, and career satisfaction. 

Library training, non-library associ-
ational affiliations, and level of education 
are some factors which seem to be quite 
strongly associated with the librar-
ian-non-librarian dichotomy since they 
emerge in the small sample conditions 
of this study. If the sample of non-li-
brarians had been larger and more rep-
resentative, other more subtle differences 
might have emerged. Gathering data for 
another study which would focus on this 
dichotomy may be worthwhile. This 
analysis suggests, in general, that the 
non-librarians are well qualified in edu-
cational background and work ex-
perience for the specialist jobs they hold 
and that they are not receiving any 
particular salary advantage over the tra-
ditionally trained librarians. ••