College and Research Libraries 50th Anniversary Feature- Personnel Issues for Academic Librarians: A Review and Perspectives for the Future Sheila D. Creth For fifty years, the personnel issues of greatest concern to academic librarians have centered on professionalism, assignments and responsibilities, credentials and compensation, and status and role within the library and the academy. While positive changes have occurred regarding these issues during this period, many remain unresolved as librarians continue to struggle to define their place in the academy. The current environment in scholarly communication and higher education is providing an opportunity for librarians to define a future that will ensure their central role in the educational process and thus resolve these remaining age-old questions. ne of the more striking aspects of the library personnel func- tion from 1939 to date is how consistent the issues and con- cerns have been. It also is clear in review- ing the literature that the environment ex- ternal to higher education has influenced both the particular issues of concern to ac- ademic librarians and their response. The most prevalent issues have been profes- sionalism, assignments and responsibili- ties for the librarian, status and role within the library and the academy, credentials, and compensation. These issues, which are interrelated, have generated a host of other issues including faculty status, col- lective bargaining, classification schemes, ratio of professional to clerical staff, partic- ipatory management, representation of women in administrative positions, peer review, evaluation processes, profes- sional development, and release time for research. And yet another issue surfaced in the 1970s of considerable concern to ac- ademic librarians: the fear librarians will be replaced by computer or information specialists in the high-tech information so- ciety of tomorrow. Along the academic library continuum from the small college library to the largest university library, the interest and re- sponse to these issues has, not surpris- ingly, varied. Has there been progress or improvement on personnel matters dur- ing this fifty-year period? Even on this agreement may depend on how one feels about the changes that have occurred and the pace of change. The two fundamental personnel issues are position responsibilities and perfor- mance expectations for academic librari- ans, and their professional status-two is- sues that are inexorably tied to one another. RESPONSIBILITIES AND EXPECTATIONS It is not possible to address the issue of Sheila D. Creth is University Librarian at the University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa 52242. 144 role and status, or professionalism, of aca- demic librarians unless one first examines the primary assignments and responsibili- ties of academic librarians both past and present. After all, what we do is what we are within the context of the academic en- vironment. While the broadly stated ob- jective for academic librarians, to organize and provide access to knowledge, has not altered, the way in which it is accom- plished, the environment in which it takes place, and the actual duties of librarians have altered over fifty years. Nonetheless, the question of whether the work of librar- ians is intellectual or routine and clerical in nature continues to be asked, and this has affected the view of librarians as profes- sionals. The American Library Association be- gan to identify professional activities as early as 1927 by developing classification schemes for professional and clerical posi- tions. 1 The first such report to focus specif- ically on academic libraries was issued in 1929.2 The ALA issued two additional re- ports on classification and pay plans for li- braries in institutions of higher education, in 1943 and 1947.3 While a 1939 report on public libraries recommended three cate- gories of staff-professional, subprofes- sional, and clerical-academic libraries continued to use only professional and clerical positions. 4 In the 1947 publication it was noted that knowledge other than of librarianship might be considered essential, and in situ- ations in which a person has specialized knowledge appointment should be as a professional. 5 A shortage of librarians beginning in the late 1940s no doubt was largely responsi- ble for the attention given to defining pro- fessional and clerical responsibilities as well as an appropriate ratio of professional to clerical staff. A major study was under- taken for the University of California li- brary system in 1947 to address "two ma- jor interrelated problems'' of the postwar era. 6 ''The first of these problems lies in student enrollment, which is rising with each semester to unprecedented figures, so that library facilities and services which may have been adequate before the war are now quite inadequate .... [and] the Personnel Issues 145 lack of sufficient qualified librarians and the deficiency in usual library salary scales."7 The result of this study was to establish four levels of librarian positions as well as a classification plan for library assistants. The authors stated that the present shortage of librarians can be parti- ally offset, and their work limited to strictly pro- fessional duties, by increasing the number of high-level subprofessional employees who can relieve librarians of a host of duties which verge on professional activity but which can effec- tively be performed by subprofessional men and women with considerable education and li- brary experience. 8 Throughout the 1940s and into the 1950s the matter of librarians' assignments along with the related issue of the ratio of professional and support staff continued to be discussed. Louis Wilson and Maurice Tauber in 1945 suggested that ''many libraries are using professionally trained personnel to perform clerical or subprofessional tasks.'' 9 And Edwin Wil- liams raised the issue of shifting the bal- ance of professional to nonprofessional staff in order to relieve librarians from as- suming such a large percentage of routine tasks. 10 A decade later, Archie McNeal conducted a study of fifty university li- braries to assess their ratio of staff in 1940, ·1948, and 1954 and concluded that "it is evident that a trend toward a higher ratio of clerical to professional staff is develop- ing but it cannot be assumed that this is a purposeful trend. Rather, it is more likely a result of growth, and of necessity im- posed by the increasing demand for pro- fessional librarians." 11 McNeal strongly endorsed a reconsideration of staffing pat- terns and assignments in the concluding remarks of his 1956 paper: In summary, it is proposed that administrators consider the duties of the professional mem- bers of their staff, and attempt to utilize profes- sional competence in the performance of work that will challenge and lead to further develop- ment of professional skill. Just as the repetitious phrases in a second-grade reader dull the inter- est and enthusiasm of an experienced reader, so will the assignment of clerical routine stultify the energetic professional librarian. It is further proposed that the subprofessional 146 College & Research Libraries be nurtured and encouraged, and that this group be given such training and advancement as may be possible. Recruitment interests can often be served through observant utilization of special skills within this category. Finally, the clerical staff, properly assigned and properly supervised, can accomplish effec- tively and efficiently much more than it is per- mitted to do in libraries. Proper delegation of responsibility, with commensurate authority, is essential to good staff organization. u Despite such frank examination of librar- ian assignments as represented by the lit- erature, Olga Bishop stated that "by the end of the 1950s librarians still had not been able either to convert their defined professional duties into full-time profes- sional positions in any type of library or to achieve recognition as a professional by the public. " 13 ~eanvvhile,begllrrninginthe1960s,pro­ fessionalism became a topic of interest to social science researchers. William Goode, a sociologist at Columbia Univer- sity, published the results of his study in 1961 in vvhich he compared librarians to the set of characteristics he considered central to professional activities. 14 In the context of his professional model, he found that librarians did not measure up, and he questioned vvhether they vvould ever become full-fledged professionals. He recommended the follovving actions to increase the professional nature of librari- ans' vvork: (1) heighten the caliber of re- cruits, (2) increase the number of years of formal education, (3) ensure that profes- sionally qualified persons do not spend time on purely clerical tasks, (4) increase funding for library research to develop the knovvledge base, and (5) change the vievv of the library from a museum or store- house to a service-oriented organization. He even suggested that a new category of "research librarian" be created. 15 Goode indicated that success in developing pro- fessionalism ''means changing the rela- tions betvveen professional and client, the professional and other professionals, the professional and the general public, and among the colleagues in their professional community. " 16 In 1964 tvvo other sociolo- gists published results of their studies of professionals vvhich included librarians. 17 March 1989 11 • •• librarians ranked among the highest in terms of hierarchy of au- thority, division of labor, rules, pro- cedures, impersonality, and techni- cal competence, which in his view indicates a higher degree of bureau- cratization.'' BothAmitaiEtzionifrom Columbia Uni- versity and Harold Wilensky at the Uni- versity of California expressed reserva- tions that librarians vvere professionals vvithin the context of their definition. A so- cial scientist at the University of ~inne­ sota focused on the relationship betvveen professionalism and bureaucracy and in- cluded librarians as one of eleven groups in his 1968 study. 18 Richard Hall found that vvhile librarians held certain philo- sophical beliefs, these vvere not strongly supported in reality. For example, though his study demonstrated that librarians held a belief in service to the public vvhich "includes the idea of indispensability of the profession and that the vvork per- formed benefits both the public and the practitioner," he questioned vvhether li- brarians really promoted their services. 19 Hall also found that librarians' belief in self-regulation and feeling of autonomy vvas among the lovvest compared vvith other groups in his study. Specifically he found that librarians ranked among the highest in terms of hierarchy of authority, division of labor, rules, procedures, im- personality, and technical competence, vvhich in his vievv indicates a higher de- gree of bureaucratization. 20 Goode completed a second study as a follovv-up to the 1961 study, and to his ear- lier conclusions he added others vvhich are reflected in the follovving statement: ''The public is not convinced that there is a basic science of librarianship: the skill is thought to be only clerical or administra- tive .... his most important reference and validating group-university profes- sors-is not likely to alter its judgment of the knovvledge-base of librarianship. " 21 There were several criteria used in these studies that excluded librarians from the definition of a professional: academic preparation, the development and appli- cation of new knowledge, activities and duties that were clerical in nature, and the lack of a collegial environment. A focus on duties and assignments, and the role of li- brarians within the organization beyond their specific assignment continued to re- ceive attention by librarians in the 1960s and 1970s. Robert Downs and Robert Delzell con- ducted a survey of library personnel at the Universities of California, Illinois, and Michigan. 22 They concluded that academic libraries were beginning to consider the three levels of positions recommended in earlier reports-professional, subprofes- sional, and clerical. They also addressed the need to establish a ratio of professional to nonprofessional staff so that librarians would not have to spend time on elemen- tary and routine tasks, obviously still a re- ality for many librarians at the time of their study in the early 1960s. Elizabeth Stone conducted a study of randomly selected librarians and con- cluded that with regard to decision mak- ing, goal setting and experimenting with new ideas, librarians felt that administra- tors were not fostering organizational con- ditions that would encourage, even mini- mally, professional growth. 23 In contrast to these findings, ~obert Presthus, in his study of the organization and authority structure in libraries, determined that while librarians perceived an external ad- ministrative control over their activities, they appeared to prefer this administra- tive authority over control by colleagues. He concluded that librarianship attracted individuals with high dependency needs. 24 Presthus also measured librari- ans' response to accommodating change and found that two-thirds were generally ambivalent in their reactions ranging from "reluctant acceptance" to a "wait-and- see" attitude . Based on results of his study regarding librarians' attitudes to- ward change and independence, he ex- pressed a concern that library work might be taken over by default by information specialists. 25 Personnel Issues 147 In his study, Kenneth Plate determined that 69 percent of the department heads in large university libraries thought of the new professional as an ''intern rather than as a professional equal and believe that only after a period of apprenticeship (which may range from six months to three years) can the subordinate be per- mitted to participate in the decision- making process.'' 26 By the beginning of the 1970s, the com- plex and often confounding questions re- garding appropriate assignments and du- ties for librarians and, by extension, their professional status and role had been re- viewed, studied, and discussed exten- sively. During the next decade, it would be clear that not only did these personnel issues remain unresolved but that they would be addressed with even more pas- sion as new dimensions surfaced: faculty status, collective bargaining, participatory management and collegial governance, and affirmative action. There is little ques- tion that the social context of the late 1960s and the 1970s brought an urgency to bear on these issues. William Axford describes the 1969 ALA convention as ''the meeting which served as a catalyst for the explosive release of a reservoir of pent-up discontent within the entire profession . . . [when] such issues as women's liberation, ethnic power, gay liberation, library governance and the so- cial responsibilities of libraries brushed aside the traditional ALA concerns as the focus of the convention. " 27 Within this context Axford describes the reaction of academic librarians to the topic of faculty status in the following way: "The aca- demic librarian's contribution to these revolutionary festivities was roaring ap- proval of a motion presented at the ACRL membership meeting which established as a major ACRL goal the achievement of full faculty status for all academic librari- ans.'' He goes on to say that ''it was too bad that the assembly did not devote equal at- tention to the serious consideration of 'at- tendant responsibilities' '' referring to li- brarians' willingness, in his view, to accept equal status with the faculty with- out fulfilling expectations for scholarly 148 College & Research Libraries pursuits. 28 Furthermore, Axford states, ''Many academic librarians, perhaps even a majority . . . tend to be strongly service and task-oriented rather than truly profes- sionally motivated-much more con- cerned with procedural details and deal- ing with the inevitable daily crises than in the macrocosm of librarianship and higher education in all its historic dimensions. " 29 Following the 1969 ALA conference, the Association of College and Research Li- braries established a committee to develop standards for faculty status for academic librarians, which were eventually ac- cepted. Throughout the 1970s the litera- ture is dotted with articles in which librari- ans argue the appropriateness of faculty status. A series of viewpoints on the identity of academic librarians presented an interest- ing contrast among eight individuals re- sponding to the lead piece written by Ax- ford. 30 Axford suggests that there had been little real gains for academic librari- ans with regard to faculty status, and therefore their professional recognition within the academy. He indicates that the social and economic context of the 1970s created an environment in which success for academic librarians receiving faculty status was limited by the intense competi- tion for tenured positions on campus as the growth and expansion in higher edu- cation not only leveled off but declined. 31 In her response to Axford, Beverly Toy, in addition to agreeing with his position on the requirements for faculty status for librarians, identifies other challenges that exist for academic librarians, including those from library assistants concerned with the ''equal pay for equal work'' issue and information scientists ''claiming their superior qualifications to manage li- braries. ''32 Maurice Marchant's response focused more on the persistent issue of ac- tivities and responsibilities of librarians that act to limit their participation in schol- arly activities. He identifies two factors that need to be addressed: "release from the performance of low level repetitive functions and enrichment of the librari- an's role by adding high-level cognitive skills, requiring high scholarly attain- ment, that enhance the library's perfor- mance."33 March 1989 A major change occurred in libraries be- ginning in the 1970s that would, over time, have a dramatic impact on how work was accomplished, who performed cer- tain activities, and ultimately organization design and the process for decision mak- ing. With the introduction of OCLC (the Online Computer Library Center) the era of computing was ushered into libraries; the implications of this technology on the library organization were not immediately recognized and would evolve over the next decade. The national cataloging data- base provided by OCLC shifted the tradi- tional division of work between profes- sional and support staff as fewer librarians were needed to handle what had previ- ously been viewed as the most intellectual of activities. In addition, a relationship be- tween library staff and members of the network emerged, particularly as evalua- tion of performance standards became a public activity rather than a local one and members of the network made judgments about a specific library's performance. "The importance of network rela- tionships and consortia! decision making began to develop in the 1970s and continues to this day to influence the approach by academic librarians to technological developments and other programmatic and operational matters such as collection manage- ment." The importance of network relation- ships and consortia! decision making be- gan to develop in' the 1970s and continues to this day to influence the appr~ach by ac- ademic librarians to technological devel- opments and other programmatic and op- erational matters such as collection management. With the advent of com- puter technology, the activities of aca- demic libraries began to alter, but equally important was the fact that their role as a member of a network or consortium be- came as important as their independent status had been in the past. Based on her analysis of job advertise- ments, Mary Wells shows that a shift did occur in the requirements and responsibil- ities for academic librarians between 1959 and 1979. Among other findings, the au- thor determined that there was a notable increase in demand in the 1970s for com- puter expertise, communicative ability, administrative ability, computer work, and administrative duties as well as for faculty liaison, personnel work, and work with specialized subjects and biblio- graphic instruction. 34 Wells concluded that academic librarians were required to "bring more to their jobs, especially in the realm of education ... [and that] there was strong evidence that the basic educa- tion requirements for entry into librarian- ship had become more structured and stringent. ''35 These findings by Wells were supported by a study conducted by Ronald Powell and Sheila Creth in 1985 to determine the knowledge required during the first ten years of the careers of academic librari- ans. 36 The authors found that while a core of traditional library knowledge is still highly valued, knowledge of manage- ment and automation are also highly val- ued by this group of librarians. Planning, personnel management, budgeting and staff training ranked high in importance as well. Meanwhile, the issue of faculty status continued to appear in the literature with both supporters and detractors conduct- ing studies and reporting on local inter- pretation of faculty status for librarians. In his article, John DePew contends that the reports that librarians have made great progress in achieving faculty status fail to identify the exceptions made for librarians in the application of faculty status. 37 Based on his analysis, DePew contends that ''even after more than a decade of 'imple- mentation,' it appears that full faculty sta- tus is almost impossible to achieve. Break- downs most often occur in the areas of tenure, rank, leaves, and length of ap- pointment, creating a 'sort of quasi- status. ''38 He suggests that ACRL should revise the standards in order to make them attainable and enable librarianship to grow as a profession on its own merits. DePew feels that ''faculty status is inap- propriate for librarians because it creates Personnel Issues 149 tensions that obscure the proper role of the librarian, and it interferes with the ef- fective delivery of library services by di- verting librarians' energies and attention from those services. ''39 On the other hand, Robert Sewell, in writing about faculty status at the University of illinois library, indicates that principles of collegiality, ac- ademic freedom, and tenure, and the con- cept of the librarian as teacher and re- searcher are viable and highly beneficial to the academic library environment. 40 In their article, Fred Hill and Robert Hauptman indicate that their focus is not on "whether librarians should be ac- corded faculty status, but rather whether they deserve it, and more importantly, what they should do with it once it has been bestowed. ''41 They then present a model for faculty status for librarians which can be summarized in the following statement: "there are conditions under which a librarian deserves faculty status, and these are precisely the same condi- tions that obtain for any faculty member at an institution: teaching, researching, and publishing." 42 It would appear that the concept of heightened status and roles for academic librarians has succeeded or floundered along the following lines: the willingness and desire of the individual li- brarian to pursue recognized scholarly ac- tivities (research and publishing) as an ex- pectation for performance, the willingness of the university to fund the li- brary so that librarians' schedules allow time for research, and, finally, attention to the type of assignments and role within the library organization that contributes in large part to the definition of librarians as professionals. In the future, the status of librarians within higher education undoubtedly will rest more on how they develop and struc- ture their role vis-a-vis students and fac- ulty in the vastly different information so- ciety. If librarians play a pivotal role in organizing and providing access to the vast range of information in multiple for- mats, if they are the ones to assist individ- uals through the labyrinth of information sources, and if they play a leadership role in designing and directing the information world, then their role on the campus should most definitely provide them with 150 College & Research Libraries a status of full partner in the educational endeavor. Patricia Battin, in her article entitled ''The Electronic Library-A Vision for the Future," indicates that the library will be the knowledge center of the academic en- terprise, and that librarians, "far from be- ing extinct in the electronic university . . . will be in greater demand than in the more serene and organized world of the book. ''43 It is also clear that the traditional duties of librarians will take on new form and that some activities should be set aside while new ones are added to the plethora of services offered by the aca- demic library. ''Over the decades, the perception of the passive role of the academic li- brary has declined and almost disap- peared." Over the decades, the perception of the passive role of the academic library has de- clined and almost disappeared. Librarians no longer are guardians of warehouses- buying materials that the faculty select, shelving it and waiting patiently at a des- ignated location for a student or faculty member to decide they have a question. Instead, librarians have assumed respon- sibility for building and managing collec- tions in all the complex manifestations that implies, e.g., resource sharing, pub- lisher and vendor relations, and preserva- tion. They have established active user ed- ucation programs to aggressively inform the academic community about resources, and there is evidence that they are assum- ing a leadership role in the design and im- plementation of computing technology as it affects the delivery of information lo- cally and nationally. All of this suggests that within the library organization, librar- ian responsibilities and the attendant knowledge required to perform effectively have increased in both new areas and depth of traditional ones. There is also evidence that librarians within their organizations have taken on March 1989 greater responsibility for decision making as the focus has shifted from a bureau- cratic, and often autocratic, environment to one that relies on participation and shared responsibility. This organizational approach, coupled with the effect that au- tomation has on work flow and communi- cation, should contribute to a natural inte- gration of a collegial environment into the academic library. More and more the fo- cus of communication and decision mak- ing in academic libraries will be highly dis- persed, with actions determined by teams and committees that connect people across the organization rather than through a hierarchy that relies almost ex- clusively on a vertical orientation. The individual librarian will accomplish his/her work through a series of networks within the library, across the campus, and throughout the nation with colleagues in other institutional libraries. There will be greater independence for the individual, and for small working groups, than has existed in the past primarily because of the structure and pace of information technol- ogy. The organization, dispersal and ac- cess of information is changing; therefore, libraries must change in order to partici- pate in this highly sophisticated system of information exchange and transfer. The bureaucratic structure of the library orga- nization, which has so limited participa- tion for librarians beyond their specific and narrow job assignment, should dis- solve. In addition, those activities which have been of a limiting nature will be ac- complished via the computer, and still others will be assigned to support staff as greater reliance on computer data locally and nationally grows. Finally, new de- mands for organizing and accessing infor- mation are on the horizon and librarians should seize the opportunity to ensure a central role in the design of the informa- tion system. There is a tremendous opportunity for librarians to use their considerable knowl- edge of languages, academic subjects, au- tomation, and, of course, the organization and access of knowledge for the support of the scholarly endeavor. There is an op- portunity to define more clearly, and in this way to strengthen, the role of the aca- demic librarian. If academic librarians are able to articulate a clear vision for their central role in higher education and act on this, they will achieve a valued place within the academy and receive the de- served respect of faculty colleagues. The issue of professional status is re- lated inexorably to how librarians feel about themselves, as well to the responsi- bilities they assume and the contributions they make within their own library and campus and more broadly to their profes- sion. Others cannot bestow status; aca- demic librarians will earn a sense of pro- fessionalism and the respect of faculty if · they create an active, visible, and critical role for themselves in the education and scholarly process. There have been changes over the past fifty years in re- sponsibilities assigned to librarians, but there has also been a reluctance too often to relinquish duties and to accept change. If academic librarians do not want to find themselves entangled in the same issues for the next fifty years, without resolution or progress, and possibly left behind by the information society, then it should be a priority to identify the way in which li- brarians will contribute as members of the educational and scholarly community, and to recognize and act on new opportu- nities even when risks are apparent. The risks are far greater if academic librarians venture nothing, if they are cautious in ac- Personnel Issues 151 tively designing the future. Veaner issued a challenge to academic librarians when he said, We need to catch up with the new reality and we need to discard old realities; we need to look forward and not backward. . . . Librarianship is an evolving profession and must continue to evolve. A universal hallmark of any profession is adaptability. The pace of change is not even remaining constant-it is quickening. If we can- not respond to the challenges now facing us and cannot adapt to change, then we can be sure that some new institution or service agency will arise in response to public need. 44 A review of the past fifty years should provide academic librarians with much to be proud of in the arena of organization improvements and personnel administra- tion. But there is also a sense that aca- demic librarians have bogged down on certain issues, particularly in resolving these age-old questions about role, status, responsibilities and clarification and re- definition of what is considered profes- sional work within the library. As Veaner has suggested, we need to address our en- ergy now and for the future in identifying and responding to the new reality, indeed to help shape and define that reality. In doing so, academic librarians should be assured that their activities will be profes- sional in nature and their status assured within the academy. REFERENCES 1. American Lib~ary Associati~n, Burea~. of Pub~c Personnel Administration, Proposed Classification and C~mpen~twn Plans fo: L!brary Posztwns (Chtcago: American Library Assn., 1927). 2. Ame?~a~ Library Assocta~on,. Committee o~ th~ Classification of Library Personnel, Budgets, Classificatwn and Compensatzon m Plans for Umverszty and College Libraries (Chicago: American Li- brary Assn., 1929). 3. J\me~ca~ Librc:rrr ~ssocia~ion, Board ~n Salaries, Staff and Tenure, Classification and Pay Plans for Lzbranes m I~s~tutzons of Hzgher Ed~catwn (Chicago: American Library Assn., 1943). American Li- brary ~ssoctati~n, Board o~ Salanes, Staff and Tenure, Classification and Pay Plans for Libraries in Instzt~tzons ~f Hzgher Edu~t!on, 2d ed. (Chicago: American Library Assn., 1947). 4. Ame~~an Ltbr~.Ass~tatio~, Board on Salaries, Staff and Tenure, Classification and Pay Plans for Mum~tpal P~bltc Ltbranes. (~hicago: American Library Assn., 1939). 5. A.I?le~c~ Ltbrc:rrr ~ssoctat_ion, Board ~n Salaries, St~f and Tenure, Classification and Pay Plans for Lzbranes m Insfttutions of Hzgher Educatton, 2d ed. (Chicago: American Library Assn., 1947). 6. Douglas W. Bryant and Boynton S. Kaiser. "A University Library Position Classification and Compensation Plan," The Library Quarterly 17:1 Gan. 1947). 7. Ibid. 8. Ibid., p.14. 152 College & Research Libraries March 1989 9. Louis R. Wilson and Maurice F. Tauber, The University Library; Its Organization, Administration and Functions (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Pr., 1945), p.247. 10. Edwin E. Williams, "Who Does What: Unprofessional Personnel Policies," College & Research Li- braries 6:301-10 (Sept. 1945). 11. Archie L. McNeal, "Ratio of Professional to Clerical Staff," College & Research Libraries17:219 (May 1956). 12. Ibid., p.223. 13. Olga B. Bishop, The Use of Professional Staff in Libraries: A Review 1923-1971 (Ottawa: Canadian Li- brary Assn., 1973), p.7. . 14. William J. Goode, "The Librarian: From Occupation to Profession?" The Library Quarterly 31:306-20 (1961). 15. Ibid., p.319-20. 16. Ibid., p.311. 17. Amitai Etzioni, Modern Organizations (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1964). H. L. Wi- lensky, "The Professionalization of Everyone?" American Journal of Sociology 70:137-58 (1964). 18. Richard H. Hall, "Professionalization and Bureaucratization," American Sociological Review 33:92-104 (1968). 19. Ibid., p.93. 20. Ibid., p. 98. 21. William J. Goode, "The Theoretical Limits of Professionalization," in The Semi-Professions and Their Organization, ed. Amitai Etzioni (New York: Free Press, 1969), p.285. 22. Robert B. Downs and Robert F. Delzell, "Professional Duties in University Libraries," College & Research Libraries 26:30-39 Oan. 1965). 23. Elizabeth W. Stone, Factors Related to the Professional Development of Librarians (Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow, 1969). 24. Robert Presthus, "Technological Change and Occupational Response: A Study of Librarians," unpublished report, 1970, ERIC document, ED 045129. 25. Ibid., p.107-109. 26. Kenneth H. Plate, Management Personnel in Libraries: A Theoretical Model for Analysis (Rockaway, N.J.: American Faculty Pr., 1970), p.43. 27. H. William Axford, ''The Three Faces of Eve: Or the Identity of Academic Librarianship. A Sym- posium," The Journal of Academic Librarianship 2:276 Oan. 1977). 28. Ibid. 29. Ibid., p.277. 30. Ibid., p.276-85. 31. Ibid., p.276. 32. Beverly Toy, "An Apt Summary," The Journal of Academic Librarianship 2:279 Oan. 1977). 33. Maurice P. Marchant, "A Ooser Look at One Profile," The Journal of Academic Librarianship 2:283 Oan. 1977). 34. Mary Baier Wells, "Requirements and Benefits for Academic Librarians: 1959-1979," College & Research Libraries 43:450-58 (Nov. 1982). 35. Ibid., p.457. 36. Ronald R. Powell and Sheila D. Creth, "Knowledge Bases and Library Education," College & Re- search Libraries 47:16-27 Oan. 1986). 37. John N. DePew, "The ACRL Standards for Faculty Status: Panacea or Placebo," College & Research Libraries 44:407-13 (Nov. 1983). 38. Ibid., p.411. 39. Ibid., p.409. 40. Robert G. Sewell, "Faculty Status and Librarians: The Rationale and the Case of illinois," College & Research Libraries 44:212-22 (May 1983). 41. Fred E. Hill and Robert Hauptman, "A New Perspective on Faculty Status," College & Research Libraries 47:156 (March 1986). 42. Ibid., p.159. 43. Patricia Battin, "The Electronic Library-A Vision for the Future," EDUCOM Bulletin (Summer 1984), p.16. 44. Allen B. Veaner, "Continuity or Discontinuity-A Persistent Personnel Issue in Academic Librari- anship," .Advances in Library Administration and Organization 1:16 (1982).