College and Research Libraries Reactions to ''1985 to 1995: The Next · Decade in Academic Librarianship ,'' Parts I and II Jane B. Robbins-Carter, Johannah Sherrer, Deborah Jakubs, and Charles B. Lowry REACTION FROM JANE B. ROBBINS-CARTER Veaner, rightly, I believe, begins his pa- per with a "cautions" section and re - minds readers, "Modern life is a perpet- ual ferment of paradox and contradiction'' (p.4). He further reminds us that though most prophecies end up somewhat off the mark, it is often possible to forward rea- sonable approximations of short-term fu- tures. I commend Veaner' s broad-ranging paper for the many facets of today' s roil- ing academic and technological environ- ment that he attempts to settle as he re- lates them to changes in academic librarianship in the decade ahead. I be- lieve he forecasts a probable and desirable future. His analysis deserves broad distri- bution and reasoned response. As but one reader, I have found very much in his pa- per about which to comment; however, I will limit my response to but two areas that he has addressed. The first is that of new or alternative administrative struc- tures for academic library management, and the second is education for academic librarian ship . Governance in Academic Libraries Veaner correctly points out that many management scholars, consultants, and practitioners believe that changes in the social and technological fabric of society, i.e., the developing information society, are signaling, if not requiring, that bu- reaucratic functional/hierarchical gover- nance structures must be redesigned. Re- quired are organizational structures that begin with a focus on outputs to be con- sumed (or even more challenging out- comes to be realized) through use of the li- brary. Such a refocusing calls for academic librarians to boldly redesign the structures of our libraries. Many of us have blanched at criticisms laid by faculty advisory groups and public policy analysts, which inform us that from their perspectives it appears that libraries are structured prin- ciply for the convenience of librarians rather than users. (We blanch from these criticisms because we know that for the most part they contain an operative nu- cleus of accuracy.) Our current functional structures orga- nized around acquisition, cataloging, cir- culation, and reference, often overlaid with a form of material departmentaliza- tion, emphasize control of material over material use. We almost always argue that we must emphasize control because of fu- ture potential uses by others; we rarely place our priorities on service to those presently requiring the material. Public Jane B. Robbins-Carter is a professor and director of the School of Library and Information Studies at the Uni- versity of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin 53706. Johannah Sherrer is director of public services in the Michener Library at the University of Northern Colorado, Greeley, Colorado 80639. Deborah Jakubs is general bibliographer in the William R. Perkins Library at Duke University, Durham, North Carolina 27706. Charles B. Lowry is director of libraries at the University of South Alabama, Mobile, Alabama 36688. He was recently ap- pointed director of libraries at the University of Texas at Arlington, a post he will assume on July 1, 1985. 309 310 College & Research Libraries administration analysts would, I believe, argue that we have suboptimized the bib- liographic control function to the detri- ment of the purpose of our libraries- information provision. Devising truly new organizational structures is not an easy task; however, if Veaner is right, as I fervently hope he is, that the production responsibilities in libraries will continue to be shifted to support personnel, we may somewhat more easily be released from our present organizational structures be- cause professional librarians will no longer be doing the production work around which our libraries are focused. As Abell calls for, we should restructure our academic libraries to emphasize services related to disciplinary groupings. These groupings form the very basis of the orga- nization of the academic environment in which the library is embedded. While aca- demic librarians have claimed that they are closely allied with the faculty in the teaching and research mission of aca- deme, our organizational structures have belied that alliance . We have structured our libraries more akin to the physical plant maintenance activities of universi- ties than to teaching and research activi- ties. The academic library structured around services to disciplines rather than around library functions would encourage the entrepreneurial attitudes claimed by Veaner to be important in the changing ac- ademic environment. While Veaner states that ''the gover- nance issue ... is far, far behind the role issue for librarians," I would argue that . new structures may greatly facilitate, and in fact may be essential to accomplish role change for librarians. It will be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to foster pro- ductive competition and entreprenurial attitudes if we maintain our present func- tional structures. Interaction with depart- . mental faculty can be fostered by disciplinary-focused academic librarians in the area of bibliographic instruction. Such instruction should be offered through academic departments, which in my view is the only means by which truly meaningful bibliographic instruction can be accomplished. Librarians allied with July 1985 disciplines may also interact with faculty more readily through participation in the research process of individual faculty or faculty groups. Such interaction is pres- ently militated against by our libraries' function-focused structures. Bold new disciplinary service organizationa:I struc- tures are required. It is ironic that the radi- cal change in organizational structure that is required can be facilitated by the hierar- chical bureaucracy that now permeates our libraries. What is required is the will- ingness of some few academic librarians to skillfully impose the needed organiza- tional change. (This enforcement of an or- ganizational structure, which requires team approaches to service-focused librar- ianship, is simply an illustration of the paradox and contradiction that Veaner claims permeates our times.) Education for Academic Librarianship I wish to begin this section of my re- sponse with a hearty endorsement of one of Veaner' s recommendations in the area of graduate education. It calls for more open communication between teaching faculty and librarians. Veaner recom- mends that academic librarians work with ALISE (Association for Library and Infor- mation Science Education) and funding organizations to establish a systematic program of linking faculty and curricula to the working rea:Iities in the modern aca- demic library. Such linkage has been ad- dressed by ALISE through a policy state- ment and through an ACRL committee, but it needs to be pursued more aggres- sively. While I certainly understand the tension (some of which is very healthy for the profession) that arises between educa- tors and practitioners, I believe we need to share with each other our knowledge and vision. Our dialogues need to be more clearly centered on sharing legitimate per- spectives rather than casting blame for faults that are observed. Many of us are deeply committed to librarianship as a profession and I believe that with the aid of practitioners through guest lecturing, research activities, professional commit- tee service, and a variety of other joint ac- tivities we can make education for librari- anship truly contributive to the goal of changing the practice of academic and re- search librarianship. Many educators responsible for aca- demic and research librarianship work dil- igently to remain abreast of the changes affecting the field. Due to the nature of the teaching profession, they are able to read extensively; further, they come into con- tact with a wide variety of support staff, from many different libraries, who have chosen to attend library school. They hear about the array of practices in the field as applied from the smallest academic li- braries to the largest. They are, as are their practicing colleagues, frustrated by theca- cophony of aspects impinging on the field and are very concerned about what is most important to teach to future profes- sionals. The observed trend in curricular design is very much away from technique and production toward the conceptual and management concerns. Many students come to our schools hop- ing to "hear the word" from the professo- riat. They too become frustrated when they find that we teach for just those types · of qualities that Veaner, Battin, and others call for, i.e., multiple working styles, flexi- bility and adaptability, knowledge of higher education, and even entrepreneur- . ial attitudes. Some faculty plant seeds in students' minds that they might even practice academic librarianship from an academic departmental home rather than from a home in a library. (Such sugges- tions are embraced by very few; most of our students consider the '' deinsti- tutionalization" of instruction, i.e., a fo- cus on the provision of information ser- vices regardless of from where these ser- . vices emerge, as rather a betrayal.) As Veaner contends, in periods of rapid change when even the short-range future is so uncertain, there is a tendency to en- trench traditional views. Despite very serious concerns related to the education of professional librarians, I believe that the most serious problem fac- ing the field is not the education of profes- sionals, because many changes have taken place, but rather the education of Reactions to 1985 to 1995 311 support staff. Throughout his paper, Veaner again and again speaks of the changing nature of the work force in aca- demic libraries: The broad and general removal of production/ manufacturing work from academic librarians is the most important change anc;l the most valuable opportunity now before the ACRL community. A major thrust of this paper is the contention that academic librarians' responsibilities have shifted heavily from production to manage- ment. As technical work in library and information is increasingly offloaded to support staff. ... We seem to have returned in a signifi- cant way to the pre-twentieth-century condition when virtually all of the educa- tion for the skill level of librarianship takes place within our libraries. Surely, if pro- fessionals are no longer doing what they used to do but that related, now nonpro- fessional work still must be done, the pro- fessionals must be training the staff. Fac- ulty have heard that today' s academic librarians need knowledge of teaching techniques and adult learning theory in order to better design and deliver biblio- graphic instruction; however, little is said about these same skills in relation to the training of support staff . ALA's "Library Education and Person- nel Utilization" (LEPU) statement ad- dresses support personnel including li- brary associates, library technical assistants, and clerks. The category of support personnel to which growing and important work is being shifted is the li- brary associate category. The educational requirement for this category is the ''bach- elor's degree (with or without course work in library science); or bachelor's de- gree plus additional academic work short of the master's degree.'' Most of our ac- credited educational programs are not de- signed to be consumed ''in part'' by those who do not intend to become profession- als. If, indeed, our programs at the M.A. level have changed as is called for, very few of the courses should be relevant to support staff. While I have little doubt that the professional staff of academic libraries 312 College & Research Libraries are capable of training support staff, I fear that the time that they should be spending on interaction with faculty and students, i.e., the delivery of service, will be ab- sorbed by the necessity to train support staff, once again turning our energies to the production function of the library, not its service function. I believe the time has come to address seriously the question of the needed edu- cation of library support staff. Many pro- fessional fields have developed educa- tional programs for support staff, e.g., dental hygienists, paralegals, physicians' assistants, and nurse practitioners. ALA's Office for Library Personnel Resources is presently conducting a review of the LEPU statement. I trust that my concern is shared with a sufficient number of others and that educational programs for sup- port staff will soon become a reality. It has been said that the salutation ''May you live in interesting times" is really a curse. We do live in most interesting times for librarians. Let us embrace them, take some risks, design more new organiza- tional structures and instructional pro- grams, and then evaluate what happens! If we do not do so aggressively, we have much to lose. REACTION FROM JOHANNAH SHERRER Veaner's View of the Future Veaner's study presents provocative scenarios for academic librarianship over the course of the next ten years. His pro- jections are low-key and somewhat con- servative. The conservative tone is set by Veaner' s balanced rational approach that in itself rejects wild futuristic projections. Because of this it is difficult to disagree in any significant measure with the overall content of this exploratory, broadly based composition. Criticism could be leveled, however, at what was not examined in the study. One item absent was a reference to declining college enrollments and the effects this factor may have on the economic future of academic libraries. All change has finan- July 1985 cial implications. In libraries, the degree to which new technologies are incorporated will almost always have a relationship to the amount of available funding. The study of financial structures governing ac- ademic institutions and their libraries would be an appropriate activity in the up- coming decade. These structures vary in detail from institution to institution, and failing to address the problem at a local level will effect the thoughtful advance- ment of individual academic environ- ments. In addressing personnel issues in aca- demic librarianship, especially those of derecruitment or outplacement, Veaner' s perspective is not that of the "working li- brarian.'' Furthermore, he fails to address a growing problem throughout all of aca- demia, specifically the declining mobility of its professional staff. The next ten years will continue to witness the lack of mobil- ity among academic employees. More- over, trends toward rigid tenure require- ments may dissuade many from moving even when economic factors do not pro- hibit such attempts. Long-term employ- ees may well be a phenomenon on the in- crease unless there is a significant change in economic factors such as interest rates and regular cost-of-living enhancements. Emphasis on hiring only superbly quali- fied individuals will not be a sufficient so- lution to this problem unless there is man- agerial talent prepared to create and monitor an environment that encourages professional growth. Veaner states that'' every institution has a social obligation to long-term employ- ees." He goes on to imply that the princi- ple challenge of this obligation is a finan- cial one in terms of encouraging early retirement or other "buy out" plans. Most "working librarians" would probably dis- agree and assert that the principle chal- lenge is in locating talented, creative ad- ministrators who recognize that obligations to long-term employees in- clude creating a challenging and satisfying work environment where daily problems are confronted directly. At any rate, inef- fectual managers, however skilled they may be in campus politics and public rela- tions, must be prepared to acknowledge responsibility for creative, positive man- agement maneuvers that enhance produc- tivity rather than stymie it. Veaner's emphasis on derecruitment of "deadwood" presents a rather flippant analogy to weeding personnel as one would weed books. Veaner states that the profession has no mechanism in place for derecruitment or outplacement and fur- ther suggests that it would be difficult, perhaps impossible, for ACRL to enter into this area. Mechanisms, however, do exist for this problem but, as in other areas of academe, they are rarely employed. The mechanisms are routine evaluation procedures, and ACRL could be of enor- mous assistance by providing written guidelines that define levels of perfor- mance in academic librarianship. Successes and Difficulties in Academic Librarianship The key to success in librarianship rests in the ability to be flexible, objective, and comfortable in continually reassessing de- cisions and professional commitments. These components will permit the widest possible margin of success. Veaner's view that academic librarians have embraced innovations far more rapidly than other members of academe is an accurate one. The real challenge lies in persuading aca- demic administrators that the viability of their libraries is dependent on change and the wise incorporation of appropriate technological innovations. While univer- sity administrations strive to endorse funding for research and development, endorsing the same concept in the devel- opment of library services has not been ea- gerly embraced. Because of these factors, only a few institutions will progress suc- cessfully to the fullest extent possiple dur- ing the next ten years. Yet, as we have seen in the previous ten years, the practi- cal assimilation of computerized biblio- graphical utilities and products will prog- ress steadily in all academic libraries. Examples of additional successes will be continued efforts at networking, technol- ogy adaptation, and increasingly effective marketing of library services. Failures in academic librarianship will continue in the same areas that have always been weak or Reactions to 1985 to 1995 313 ambiguous. The areas of facu.lty status, the role of the academic librarian, and per- sonnel management may well go unre- solved. In summary, Veaner suggests that achievements in academic librarianship will continue to occur in those areas that have a history of success. He is less san- guine about areas that are currently weak or ambiguous. In fact, his reluctance to postulate a resolution on issues such as faculty status and role clarification is an ac- knowledgment not only of the difficulties inherent in the issues themselves, but also an acknowledgement of concern as to the probability of ACRL successfully grap- pling with these significant problem is- sues in the near future. How truly signifi- cant it would be if academic librarianship could gain measurable strides in just one of these weak or ambiguous areas. To suc- ceed in areas of strength is usually far less significant than succeeding in areas of known weaknesses . The Knowledge Role The "knowledge role" has always ex- isted among academic librarians. It has been most visible among librarians en- gaged in reference services and collection development activities. It has gained re- cent status in the professional literature primarily due to the decrease of profes- sional involvement in technical service ac- tivity. Is the "knowledge" role more im- portant in the upcoming decade than in past decades? I think not . It has always been acutely important, but its function is perhaps now more noticeable and profes- sionally attractive to promote. Current Functions and Future Requirements Academic librarians will adjust easily and eagerly to the new skills and require- ments needed for the successful imple- mentation of improved library services. The structure for such an occurrence is al- ready in place. We have a body of litera- ture that can be expanded, tightened, en- . hanced, or revised as we wish. The key issue is that a body of literature does exist and its writings do project an image and to 314 College & Research Libraries a great degree reveal our own perception of our role. Our professional association is a vocal one and one that endeavors to appeal to the working librarian. With this orienta- tion it has the ability to garner strong grass-roots support and represent a wide, all-encompassing base. · ACRL's strong stand on quality contin- uing education provides a mechanism for professionals to acquire needed skills or information pertaining to new trends in the field. This emphasis also serves as a constant reminder that we each have a professional obligation to continually en- hance our own professional growth and development. We have a body of literature, a strong professional association, an acknowl- edged dependence on quality continuing education, and a belief that collegial com- munication through meetings, work- shops, and informal get togethers can fos- ter continued growth and development. We will be held in check primarily by the cumbersome, broader organizational framework that generally characterizes ac- ademic institutions of higher education. This check should serve also as our chal- lenge. The ability to persuade our aca- demic colleagues that they need access to creative library services will help . Our ability to justify this role will depend en- tirely on those of us working directly with the library users. We need to present the working librarian as a broadly educated, well-read, articulate professional with sound communication abilities. REACTION FROM DEBORAH JAKUBS Librarians are facing a crisis and a chal- lenge in the decade ahead. Changes in our environment are forcing us to do what Al- len Veaner has done: to look long and hard at our goals and our roles in order to seize the opportunities that technology and changes in patterns of scholarship and the organization of knowledge are of- fering. It is a critical time to aim to improve our image and status as individuals and as a group. We are faced with an opportunity July 1985 to innovate, to add layers of complexity to our tasks, as well as to reaffirm our tradi- tional role, thus renewing the spirit of the profession. Allen Veaner' s article provides much food for thought. I agree generally with his view of the future for librarians, but I would like to stress that most of his con- clusions are predicated on a few very basic changes that must come about before we are able to accept the new responsibilities he foresees fqr the coming decade. I will focus my comments on those fundamen- tal changes. The first and most important change must take place in the internal and external image of the librarian. We must clarify our identity, as individuals and as a profession, if we are to meet the approach- ing challenges. If we are to expand our skills as Veaner suggests, we must wel- come innovation in both the technological and organizational spheres of our profes- . sionallives and call attention to our ability to handle it. This implies that we must, in effect, do more than keep up with change; we should anticipate it and initiate it. Veaner calls attention to the "fuzzy im- age" of librarians. I would add that we are often taken for granted within the univer- sity, where the primary players are gener- ally perceived to be faculty and students. We are partly at fault for this low visibility. It is significant that we find it necessary to compare ourselves with faculty. It is as if we had no internal model, no professional definition (other than the M.L.S., and that degree is not always a consistent crite- rion), for what it takes, what it means tp be a librarian. I would venture to say that it is a lack of confidence-maybe not always overt, perhaps only nagging, but persis- tent nonetheless-in our role and worth in the research community that drives us to seek our model in the faculty. We must, in the decade ahead, give ourselves credit, make it clear first to ourselves, then tooth- ers, that we like our jobs, we have chosen to be librarians, and we have important skills to share. We do not wish to be com- pared with faculty (though we may envy their economic benefits and summers off), nor should we be. While our jobs both re- quire serious intellectual effort, they are also very different. As a colleague put it, "If we wanted to be faculty, we would be faculty." The fact is that we have chosen to be librarians, and although faculty are our closest models, it does not benefit us to be compared to them or to imagine our- selves to be in their shadow. . Publishing serious scholarly work should continue to be an important factor in evaluating librarians, but again, our sit- uation differs significantly from that of faculty. Most of us hold full-time jobs and are not expected or encouraged to carry out research and writing on ''company time," whereas writing is a part of a pro- fessor's daily routine. How can we incor- porate research and writing officially into our positions? What about allowing sab- baticals for librarians, or makirig formal acknowledgement of the need to publish? Perhaps we should review the criteria we use to determine the quality of a librari- an's performance to determine the impor- tance of publishing as compared with other standards. Work on changing our self-image should begin in the library schools. I wholeheartedly agree with Veaner that there must be improvement in graduate li- brary education before we will be up to meeting the challenges of the next decade. The library profession should be con- cerned about attracting bright and dy- namic individuals with well-developed in- terpersonal skills who are seeking a library degree because they are actively attracted to the job of librarian, not merely because _ they like to read or "enjoy books." Ours should not be perceived as a passive pro- fession. Similarly, the library school cur- riculum should be revised to reflect the "competencies" Veaner has emphasized, incorporating the rigor necessary to make it a truly professional program of study. We should stress management and ana- lytical skills as well as technological fore- sight, all of which will be required of suc- cessful librarians in the future. To change our external image success- fully will require the education of faculty and administrators. Let's face it: many, if not most faculty members have but a slight grasp of the complexity, biblio- graphic and otherwise, of library work. Their main concern when it comes to the Reactions to 1985 to 1995 315 library is that the librarians have antici- pated their research needs, already have ordered the appropriate materials, and have them available on the shelf. This is, of course, a legitimate desire and one that a good collection development librarian should aim to fulfill. But those research needs are rapidly changing and are no longer restricted to books. Librarians have a larger role to play (as Veaner indicates) as intermediaries, teachers, and inter- preters. We should turn the needs of our patrons to our advantage and equip our- selves with the knowledge to satisfy their demands. The process of educating fac- ulty must be conducted one-on-one. Few faculty members are interested in attend- ing meetings to learn about the library's functions. They are primarily interested in what can help them specifically, in learn- ing what they need to know to take the next step in their research, to get books or- dered for reserves, etc. Our goal then is to accept both the "traditional" and "knowledge" roles (as Veaner describes them) with confidence. It is to understand and anticipate patrons' needs and to dis- play our knowledge and abilities as part of our job. Faculty respond well to librarians they respect and trust to interpret their work, and news travels fast within aca- demic departments. Patrons, especially faculty, can be both our worst detractors and our most loyal and vocal supporters. In the chain of educating the university community about the library and librari- ans, this kind of direct communication with faculty, whether it involves consult- ing on the value of adding a periodical title to the collection or discussing the features of a new database, is the strongest link. One further point on our image: the li- brary and the librarian are more constant than the faculty in the life of the univer- sity. It is not true that librarians do not teach useful skills. In many cases, in fact, students learn from librarians skills upon which they will rely throughout their lives (in contrast with some of what they may learn in class). Thus, the librarian can play a critical role in the university and should be encouraged to pursue broader involve- ment in the institution. This may include participating in university-wide commit- 316 College & Research Libraries tees, not only those with direct relevance for the library. We are in an excellent posi- tion to learn daily about the educational process at our respective institutions through formal and informal relation- ships. We must take the initiative to make worthwhile contributions of our ideas and energy to the university. Consistent external support is another precondition for the implementation of Veaner's ideas and predictions. If we suc- ceed at educating faculty and administra- tors, we are opening lines of communica- tion that will facilitate our securing that support. Without that assistance, librari- ans will have a difficult time adapting to what will be required of them. Librarians have many good ideas; many may already have anticipated Veaner' s predictions, at least in their minds or even on paper. But these ideas will not reach fruition and will result only in frustration if the university administration is not sympathetic to them and convinced of the necessity of their im- plementation. A good example is the closer relationship Veaner envisions be- tween the library and the university com- putation center. It is almost certain that many of the same questions are debated and discussed across campus in different forums. If it were possible to forge the links Veaner describes and coordinate the efforts of various groups, foremost among them the library, much energy could be re- directed and the library would be drawn into university decision making, as it should be. Just as educating faculty and adminis- trators is not an easy task, Veaner' s call to ''restructure the academic library'' will take time. If it is true that change comes slowly to the university, it comes even more slowly to the library. We have a lot of organizing to do in our workplaces to de- vise and agree on joint goals and to con- vince our colleagues throughout the li- brary of the need for restructuring. Overcoming departmentalization will not be easy. Veaner' s article might have bene- fitted from more attention to technical ser- vices librarians and what they can expect during the next decade. Except for a few references to catalogers, his ''academic li- brarian'' seems to resemble more closely July 1985 an individual working in public services . Additiona1 discussion of the necessary in- teraction between technical and public services in meeting the challenges of the future would have clarified the specifics of the challenge he foresees. Shared goals, improved communication, and an open attitude toward change are only a few of the prerequisites for the adaptations Veaner has identified as likely to face us in the coming decade. In short, we are facing a set of challenges that require that we overcome what might be called an "identity crisis" if we are to meet them. The preconditions for our suc- ceeding are few but critical. Librarians must work to become more confident as individuals and as a profession. We must forge direct, collegial relationships with faculty, administrators, and other pa- trons, educating them to the problems and potential of the library. At the same time, we must seek tangible support for the technological growth and staff train- ing that will be required . It is not only the library but the university as a whole that will be experiencing change, and librari- ans have a large and critical role to play in that process. We should begin now to or- ganize ourselves to meet the challenges that Veaner has described. REACTION FROM CHARLES B. LOWRY In the welter of concern about the role of academic librarianship in the ''electronic'' libraries of the future, Allen Veaner identi- fies the extreme positions and provides a balanced and insightful analysis of the forces that we face. He rightly rejects what might be called the "Jeremiah position" that librarianship is doomed as a disci- pline and profession or the ''Pollyanna position" that we shall move into the fu- ture by just doing the same old things bet- ter. He provides a concrete set of actions to be taken by individual academic librarians and in concert through their primary pro- fessional organization, the Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL). This is not some middle-ground compro- mise but a lucid vision for action . The fact remains that this is an important paper that should be read again and again. Moreover, it should be acted upon. Veaner's paper is divided into two parts and includes a series of recommendations to ACRL. Part I deals with the context, fundamental changes, and possible fu- tures for librarianship and Part II with the knowledge, skills, abilities, and attitudes that will be required of individual librari- ans over the decade from 1985 to 1995. One should remember that the context of the paper is the academic library, and that many of its prescriptions are relevant only in that context. Nonetheless, the analysis is frequently applicable to librarians in other types of libraries. Veaner' s premise is that libraries will continue to exist, whatever they are called, and will house both print and elec- tronic formats. But fundamental changes occurring in information technology will . dictate a tra~sformation. In some ways the electronic information of the future will be more difficult for the end user to access be- cause of its" invisibility," its technological base requiring systems knowledge, its quality of being reorganizable, and its costliness. Given these conditions, librari- ans, by whatever name, will be the "ex- pert intermediaries in the research pro- cess." They are "capable of complementing faculty through several invaluable roles: research colleague, bib- liographic expert, system manager, and information system instructor.'' Veaner touches on the need for the li- brarian to develop links between informa- tion systems by working with technolo- gists. There is great opportunity here. For instance, some of the best integrated li- brary automation comes from systems de- veloped in academic libraries. Because technologists who develop information systems rarely have the background to deal with the world of researchers who use those systems, academic librarians must associate themselves as closely as possible with technologists, especially in the computer center, and librarians will perforce continue playing the key role of interpreting those systems to end users who are unlikely to develop the requisite expertise. Reactions to 1985 to 1995 317 The related question of whether new in- formation technologies are available for free is really a straw man issue. Of course they are not, but the issue is whether cost will be directly charged to patrons or budgeted in some other way. A new kind of financial accountability will arise from these circumstances. However, Veaner does not adequately address the conun- drum that results when the network or commercial vendor tries to secure its fiscal future through attempts to control infor- mation by controlling the "package" it is in. For instance, OCLC' s copyright does not apply to the data itself but to the for- mat. ALA has appointed a task force on this issue. ACRL should likewise take con- crete action with regard to the uses of copyright. Librarianship is above all an intellectual enterprise involving people, physical re- sources, and a communication system. As such it is a discipline unlike others in aca- deme. Given this fact, its role in academe must be articulated and secured. In part this can be accomplished by enhancing the value of the MLS through several mea- sures: strengthening curricula, recruiting the "best and brightest" students, and ex- panding study to two full years. However, this work will not be successful unless the image, status, and pay of academic librari- ans is commensurate with their role, and Veaner prescribes steps which we must take to achieve this end. Among these, co- operation with other learned societies is an excellent idea, but changing attitudes at grass roots, especially those of our local faculty, are essential. Likewise, programs to educate academic administrators are es- sential to combat misperceptions of librar- ians. The Alliance for Excellence pointed to this need in the K-12 sector. It is equally important in postsecondary education. In higher education, administrators gener- ally are trained in specific subject disci- plines and rise through the professorial ranks to administrative positions. It is not surprising then that their view of what a library is or should be is largely deter- mined by the experiences they had in graduate school or as an academic teacher and researcher. The work of broadening this perspective will fall most heavily on 318 College & Research Libraries July 1985 the chief library administrator. But indi- viduallibrarians must act in ways that are proactive and demonstrate the value of their role while understanding that library faculty will be distinguished by the very nature of their activities from their teach- ing colleagues. The idea that management is supplant- ing production in librarianship is a key idea in Veaner's analysis and is probably correct. He believes that the application of technology (particularly automation) and standardization in libraries transforms the work of librarians in two ways. The tradi- tional'' production'' work is ''off-loaded'' to clerical staff simply because it has be- come routine. This trend will continue and accelerate, leaving librarians the dual ' responsibility of managing the use and de- velopment of information systems that will require both intellectual and fiscal management skills. Equally important will be the management of staff who are assuming the more routine but technology-based work of libraries. How- ever, the paper is too sanquine in its esti- mates of the effects this will have on the profession. It will take longer than ten years for library schools to transform cur- ricula and provide the ''intellectual'' skills and training required and even longer for the job advertisements for library faculty to reflect these requirements instead of "production" skills. Veaner has prepared eighteen well- constructed recommendations for ACRL that provide a plan of action designed (1) to assure that the role and status of librari- ans are clearly understood in the academic community, (2) to provide the "best and brightest" librarians to fulfill that critical role, and (3) to ensure the centrality of li- brarianship to the teaching and research missions of postsecondary education. Certainly, each of these recommendations can be effective if supported by an appro- priate plan of action. However, it will be no easy task for ACRL to secure organiza- tional and fiscal support for this agenda. Veaner has in fact pointed out a serious obstacle. "In many ways ACRL repre- sents the ultimate in professional fragmentation so characteristic of librari- anship. The ALA Handbook of Organization for 1983-84 reveals that ACRL is com- prised of nearly 250 separately identifiable units." This commentary has supported Allen Veaner' s assessment of our present situa- tion, vision of the future, and recommen- dations for action. In concluding, the au- thor would suggest several additional but related recommendations for ACRL: (1) Centrifugal forces have been unleashed by the database copyright issue. ACRL should actively participate in this debate and develop a coherent position that does more than merely state the problem. The ACRL position should be aimed at defus- ing the copyright issue in order to main- tain the invaluable resource-sharing sys- tem represented by networks. (2) Veaner emphasized the need to diversify and strengthen graduate training in librarian- ship. ACRL should also find ways to en- courage the retraining of librarians in the field. Workshops and symposia are im- portant in this process, but library schools can play a significant role as a resource for retraining. (3) Veaner wishes librarians to increase their research and publication ac- tivity. Similarly, he has called for them to involve themselves with technologists in providing innovation in information sys- tems. It is clear that grants are the life- blood of research and publication in many subject disciplines. Significant resources for research need to be available to librari- ans as well. ACRL should find ways to provide grant money for original research that will help librarians to develop new in- formation delivery systems and interfaces between those that do exist (whether manual or electronic). (4) Veaner suggests that ACRL should change its name to the Association of College and Research Li- brarians. This he rightly believes will place the organization in the same stance as the scholarly associations in the subject disci- plines. This recommendation arises from the fact that librarians are too often associ- ated with buildings, equipment, and col- lections rather than librarianship. True though this may be, academic libraries will continue to be the vehicle through which librarianship supports the research and teaching functions. It is important that ACRL support adequate funding of li- braries by setting in motion a mechanism for continued revision of the standards for college and junior college libraries. More- over, these standards should be seriously adopted by higher education in general as benchmarks of library service and should result in funding when they reveal inade- quacy. ACRL should also encourage re- gional accrediting agencies to use such standards or develop standards of their Reactions to 1985 to 1995 319 own. We should not underestimate the significance of the effect that standards can have on the debate over resource allo- cation in our colleges and universities. It is clear that academic administrators take se- riously the requirements of accrediting agencies in the subject disciplines, and ACRL standards may do the same for li- braries. IN FORTHCOMING ISSUES OF COLLEGE & RESEARCH LIBRARIES Academic Library Services: The Literature of Innovation by Judy Reynolds and Jo Bell Whitlach Circulation Service Desk Operations: Costing and Management Data by Pat Weaver-Meyers, Duncan Aldrich, and Robert B. Seal Research Libraries in an International Setting: Requirements for Expanded Resource Sharing by Richard M. Dougherty The State of Public Relations in Academic Libraries by Vikki Ford Thinking Big: A Commentary on the Research Agenda in Academic Librarianship by Paul Metz