mcCracken.p65 400 College & Research Libraries September 2000 The Presence of the Doctorate among Small College Library Directors Peter McCracken Although a doctorate provides a library director with little practical assis­ tance toward fulfilling his or her job, many college and university admin­ istrators seem to expect library directors to have one. The presence of the doctorate has been studied extensively within ARL institutions, but not within small colleges. This article explores the presence of the doc­ torate among small college library directors, considering gender and tenure in addition to size of the library, the college, and the library staff. This research finds that 20 percent of library directors at Baccalaureate I institutions have doctorates, and 40 percent have second master’s degrees. Librarians with doctorates do not direct larger institutions than those without Ph.D.s. The value of the doctorate, and its future among female directors in particular, is considered. ibrarians expend much energy, both informally and in journal articles and books, discussing the importance of the doctor­ ate in librarianship. About half the country’s colleges and universities offer librarians faculty status, but unlike their teaching colleagues, very few of these li­ brarians hold doctorates.1 A master ’s de­ gree in library science is considered a ter­ minal degree, and unlike in classroom teaching settings, a doctorate is not a re­ quirement for employment. Nevertheless, the advanced degree often provides a cer­ tain distinction that administrators and teaching faculty find irresistible. Al­ though a doctorate is not required for most librarian positions, and despite its lack of relevance to the administrative work of a library director, most institu­ tions desire, and some require, that the director hold a doctorate.2 Through the years, researchers have explored the educational background of directors at ARL libraries, and many con­ clusions can be drawn from these results. A few studies have attempted to compare ARL and non-ARL institutions, but prob­ lems in methodology have prevented comparable results. Smaller research projects have described the backgrounds of library directors in regional settings, and other authors have analyzed the na­ ture of the library director ’s work envi­ ronment in small college libraries, par­ ticularly in relation to large research in­ stitutions.3, 4 Julie O’Keeffe’s recent study looked at the first directorship held by small college directors in the midwest.5 However, 75 percent of her respondents were from less-selective Baccalaureate II institutions. Few researchers have ex­ plored the presence of the doctorate among directors at small, selective col- Peter McCracken is Coordinator for Reference Services in Odegaard Undergraduate Library at the Uni­ versity of Washington; e-mail: petermcc@u.washington.edu. 400 mailto:petermcc@u.washington.edu http:doctorates.1A The Presence of the Doctorate among Small College Library Directors 401 leges. This study aims to fill that void and to shed light on the presence and impact of the doctorate among small college li­ brarians. This research found that 20 percent of library directors at small colleges hold doctorates, and an additional 40 percent hold second master ’s degrees. Librarians holding doctorates do not direct signifi­ cantly larger libraries in terms of either volumes of books or size of budget. Com­ plete comparisons, based on Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) data and biographical data for librarians, contrast these numbers by gen­ der, educational background, and school data. Review of the Literature About half a dozen articles on the changes in ARL library directorships have been published in the past two decades. How­ ever, none have studied these changes in small college libraries; only one compared ARL statistics directly with non-ARL uni­ versities. John Caldwell’s 1962 study of library directors by library size found that even among the smallest libraries, some directors possessed doctorates, although most were in subjects other than library science.6 Arthur M. McAnally and Robert B. Downs’s seminal article on the demands of librarianship on directors first identi­ fied many of the changes that were tak­ ing place.7 One item most commonly noted was the expected shortening of ten­ ure for library directors, primarily due to the expansion of pressures on the direc­ tor. In comparisons among like-sized in­ stitutions, McAnally and Downs deter­ mined that “oddly, the chief librarians of colleges and junior colleges do not appear to be affected” by these dramatic changes in tenure lengths. This topic has been de­ bated by others and interpreted in sev­ eral different ways in follow-up surveys. William L. Cohn also cited the “appar­ ently rapid turnover in leadership at our largest and most prestigious academic li­ braries,” but his hypothesis has yet to be applied systematically to, or analyzed in, small college settings.8 Cohn compiled a series of complex tables reflecting the degrees held by ARL directors between 1933 and 1973. By selecting institutions that were ARL members in 1973 and com­ paring their library directors over the pre­ vious four decades, he determined that there was no dramatic increase in the number of doctorates held by these direc­ tors between 1933 and 1973. This result is particularly interesting in light of the fact that only forty-three of the seventy-four institutions he studied were members of ARL through that entire time period. University administrators presumably had an interest in increasing institutional respect through achievements such as ARL membership, and the evidence sug­ gests that they felt a doctorate was not a necessary requirement for the directors they selected to take them to those higher plateaus. However, Cohn did show that some form of “professional” training became one requirement for these newly ap­ pointed directors. In 1933, more than 60 percent of the library directors did not have professional degrees, but by 1973, that percentage was cut in half and was held there primarily due to a number of incumbents who had received director­ ships without professional degrees years before. Perhaps the most surprising result in Cohn’s study is that, despite a doubling of the number of Ph.D.s granted in library science between 1968 and 1972, the num­ ber of ARL directors with the degree ac­ tually declined slightly between 1933 and 1973. This also was the case for Ph.D.s in fields other than library science. In all like­ lihood, those having recently completed the degrees were not yet in positions to compete for ARL directorships, but in fact other studies have shown that this trend has continued. Jerry L. Parsons analyzed the differ­ ences in educational backgrounds be­ tween directors of ARL institutions in 1958 and 1973.9 He found that in 1958, more than half the directors held Ph.D.s, although only twelve of the degrees, or less than half, were in library science. In 402 College & Research Libraries September 2000 1973, about 30 percent of the directors held Ph.D.s and, again, less than half of the degrees (eleven in all) were in library science. The number of institutions in each year ’s study grew from forty-two in 1958 to seventy-eight in 1973. Parsons was surprised to discover that of the thirty- eight directors in 1973 who held a master ’s degree in library science, only six held a second master ’s degree. Ronald Dale Karr compared another fifteen-year span in ARL directors and found an even greater development of professionalism. In 1966, 15 percent of the directors did not have library degrees, but “by 1981 every ARL director was a gradu­ ate of a certified graduate library pro­ gram.”10 In contrast, Karr identified a sur­ prising drop in the number of directors with doctorates—from nearly half of the directors holding some form of doctorate in 1966 to only a third in 1981. He theo­ rized that “a second master ’s degree in a subject area had become an acceptable substitution for the doctorate.”11 A more accurate representation may be that, for reasons other than level of education, li­ brary directors with second master ’s de­ grees are the more qualified individuals, rather than actually “acceptable substi­ tutes.” Perhaps the library directors of 1966 were trained in academic subjects and drawn from the institution’s teach­ ing faculty, whereas those of 1981 received training in library science and were drawn from other professional positions in librarianship. Another interesting sta­ tistic identified by Karr is that nine of the eighty-three ARL directors in 1966, or 11 percent, had received bachelor ’s degrees from the institutions they were then di­ recting. One might expect this statistic to be significantly more pronounced among small colleges. William S. Wong and David S. Zubatsky were the first to compare ARL tenure statistics with those in non-ARL doctorate-granting colleges and univer­ sities.12 Using a two-page questionnaire and some published library statistics, Wong and Zubatsky attempted to ascer­ tain specific statistics in non-ARL univer­ sities and then compare them with ARL universities. Their questions on the edu­ cational degrees held by directors con­ tained what they termed “a slight ambi­ guity,” which led to some respondents indicating only their highest degree re­ ceived, rather than all degrees earned to date. The result was that only half of the directors stated that they held an MLS, raising questions about the results on this section of their survey. Among small college librarians, results from this survey show clearly that librarians with Ph.D.s do not, on average, direct libraries with significantly more students, vol­ umes, librarians, staff, or budgets. More recently, Marcia J. Myers and Paula T. Kaufman compared changes among ARL directors between 1970 and 1989.13 Myers and Kaufman believe that their data supports Karr’s suggestion of a second master’s degree being an accept­ able substitute for the doctorate. Again, the lack of doctorates among this group does not confirm this hypothesis. A study ana­ lyzing educational backgrounds of final candidates for directorships, comparing the backgrounds of those offered a posi­ tion with those not offered a position, may begin to answer this question. However, without knowing the pool from which can­ didates were chosen and the reasons for those selections, one cannot determine whether the second master ’s was actually an “acceptable substitute.” Myers and Kaufman determined that 38.3 percent of the ARL directors in 1989 held a Ph.D. in library science or another subject field, a decline from 43.9 percent of the population in 1970. About 22 per­ cent of the group held a second master ’s degree, up from 18 percent in 1970. The number of ARL directors with Ph.D.s may have increased dramatically in the past decade, so it is important to note that a greater differential between the two groups may exist currently than in 1989. O’Keeffe’s 1998 study of directors at midwestern colleges focused on directors’ http:sities.12 The Presence of the Doctorate among Small College Library Directors 403 experiences in obtaining their first posi­ tion.14 Some specific items, such as data on alumni versus nonalumni directors, are particularly interesting, as is her find­ ing on the very short time that elapsed before some directors received their first directorship. “The only alarming data from the survey,” she writes, were that almost 20 percent of first- time directors had one year of pro­ fessional library experience or less when they assumed their position and that 14 percent had not held any professional jobs when they as­ sumed their first director ’s position. It is difficult to imagine that these individuals would possess the knowledge and skills necessary to perform well.15 O’Keeffe’s study found that, on average, directors have held their current positions (not necessarily their first position) for 11.5 years. The gender differences, par­ ticularly among those with Ph.D.s or sec­ ond master ’s degrees, were particularly notable. O’Keeffe did not explore the length of time people held their first po­ sition. Because some of her respondents were still in their first position and oth­ ers had moved on and completed their first tenure as a library director, such a comparison would have been inappropri­ ate. Seventy-five percent of the respon­ dents in O’Keeffe’s survey work at Bac­ calaureate II schools, whereas all of the subjects in this survey work at Baccalau­ reate I schools. All of the research of the past several decades makes it clear that the individu­ als of interest in most studies are those directing large academic research librar­ ies. However, the number of individuals holding such positions is relatively small. A larger group of equally important li­ brary directors exists, and members of this group have rarely been the subjects of research designed to learn anything about their characteristics or back­ grounds. This survey attempts to initiate a response to this neglect. Methodology The author sought information on the educational background of directors at selective liberal arts colleges in 1998. The study considered the number and type of educational degrees the directors held, as well as their tenures as director in each institution. Statistical information on their library and their institution, specifically on the size in volumes and budget re­ ported by the institution, the number of professionals and FTE staff in the library, and the number of students at the insti­ tution, was used to compare libraries. The author used the Carnegie Classi­ fication of Institutions of Higher Educa­ tion as a sampling frame and selected every second institution included in the Baccalaureate (Liberal Arts) Colleges I list­ ing, a group of 166 institutions.16 Because the primary goal of the research was the study of the doctorate among college li­ brarians and the size of these librarians’ libraries, institutions with acting direc­ tors, rotating deans of the library, or li­ braries that served more than one discrete institution were replaced with institutions not under such limitations. Directors at eighty-three institutions were selected, and information on each director’s edu­ cational background and tenure as direc­ tor was gathered from standard bio­ graphical sources, college catalogs, and college, library, or personal Web pages. Much of this information then was con­ firmed through an e-mail message to each director for whom a valid e-mail address could be found; 79 percent replied to the message. The 1996 preliminary IPEDS database, downloaded from the U.S. De­ partment of Education’s Web site, pro­ vided statistical data on each institution. Information on the number of students at an institution was gathered from the 1998 Barron’s Profiles of American Colleges.17 Results Among eighty librarians for whom suffi­ cient information could be found, forty- seven were men (59%) and thirty-three were women (41%). One-fifth held doc­ torates, two-fifths held second master ’s http:Colleges.17 http:institutions.16 404 College & Research Libraries September 2000 TABLE 1 Directors of Small College Libraries, Divided by Gender and Education Level Librarians with a Ph.D. Librarians with a 2nd Master's Librarians with an MLS Only Librarians with No MLS Totals Women Men Totals 5 11 16 11 20 31 17 15 32 0 1 1 33 47 80 degrees, two-fifths held an MLS only, and one did not hold the MLS. These results compare closely with those found in O’Keeffe’s 1996 survey of midwestern Baccalaureate I and II schools. She noted a closer parity in gender, with about 53 percent of her respondents being male, compared to 59 percent of the subjects in this study. Moreover, she found that 14 percent of her respondents held doctor­ ates and 38 percent held a second master’s degree. This study found that 20 percent of the subjects for whom information could be found held a doctorate, and an additional 40 percent held a second master’s (see table 1). Among the sixteen directors with Ph.D.s, only six were in information sci­ ence, library science, or information and library science. Of the remaining ten, only the fields of anthropology and German each appeared twice; all doctorates are in the liberal arts.18 Myers and Kaufman showed that nearly 40 percent of library directors in ARL libraries held doctorates in 1989, twice the percentage of librarians in small college libraries. Among small college librarians, results from this survey show clearly that librar­ ians with Ph.D.s did not, on average, di­ rect libraries with significantly more stu­ dents, volumes, librarians, staff, or bud­ gets. Differences are minimal, at best. Tables 2 and 3 show the mean and me­ dian averages for library directors for whom information could be found, sorted by gender and level of education attained. One male subject, who apparently did not hold an MLS, was not included in these computations. Overall, libraries directed by men have slightly larger volume counts (5.5% larger), slightly larger bud­ gets (3.8%), more students (16.3%), and nearly identical FTE library employees (0.7% less) compared with those directed by women. Among the seventy-five directors for whom information was available on where they received their undergraduate degrees, seven are directing libraries at their alma maters. Karr noted that 11 per­ cent of ARL directors in 1966 had received bachelor ’s degrees from their employers, compared with 10.7 percent of the sub­ jects in this study. Perhaps the most surprising result in the study is the length of time that indi­ viduals have held their tenure as library director. Table 4 shows that among the sev­ enty-five individuals for whom tenure in­ formation could be found (60% men, 40% women), men have held their positions much longer than women, and the differ­ ence is particularly notable among those with a Ph.D. The comparisons only ap­ proach parity among directors with an MLS degree only. One female director, re­ sponding to the author ’s e-mail confirma­ tion survey, argued that the push to in­ crease the number of women in adminis­ trative positions might decrease the num­ ber of female library directors holding doctorates. Results bear this out and also show a great disparity in the length of time that women and men with doctorates have held their directorships. Not only was the average time as di­ rector greater among men, but the range The Presence of the Doctorate among Small College Library Directors 405 N N NNN N NN N NN N \ \ � \ \ \ � \\ \ \ � � ion, among library directors with Ph.D.s and appointed in the past six years, five have been women and two have been men. If this is a trend that continues, library directorship can expect to achieve gender parity, although it will take several retire­ ments and many years. Obviously, achieving gender equivalency, where the percentage of female li­ brary directors accurately reflects the percentage of female librarians, will take much longer. An even more marked trend can be seen among directors holding a second master ’s degree. This study found that of the ten directors hold­ ing a second master ’s and appointed in the past seven years, eight have been women and just two have been men. Discussion Many college and university admin­ istrators argue that the library direc­ tor should hold a doctorate; indeed, 23 percent of academic directorship advertisements in College & Research Libraries News in 1998 and 1999 ei­ ther required or preferred a doctor­ ate, and 21 percent required or pre­ ferred a second master ’s degree or doctorate.19 Administrators may be­ lieve that library directors with doc­ torates can provide better service to students pursuing a doctorate be­ cause they have a better understand­ ing of the process. Of course, this should not be an issue among librar­ ians at Baccalaureate I institutions, which by definition do not grant doctoral degrees. Another argument also was much greater. In this study, no may be that because the vast majority of woman with a doctorate has held her cur- teaching faculty at small and large col- rent position for more than six years and leges and universities hold doctorates, the no woman with a second master ’s for college librarian should as well, perhaps more than twenty years. In contrast, more as a form of educational penance. than half of the male directors with a Librarianship is filled with individu­ Ph.D. have held their position for more als who, after completing doctoral work than ten years; only two of the eleven in their respective fields, have turned to have held their position for less than six librarianship for employment. In discus- years. Looking at the results in this fash- sions with the author, some doctorate­ http:doctorate.19 406 College & Research Libraries September 2000 holding library students, perhaps ruing their earlier educational choices, argued that their doctoral degree does not help them in librarianship: they know arcane items of knowledge about their particu­ lar topic, but this knowledge does them little good in assisting patrons at a refer­ ence desk or in cataloging books in an­ other field. However, these students miss the point of teaching faculties’ interest in a librarian with a doctorate: teaching fac­ ulty do not seek someone with esoteric knowledge in a given field but, rather, someone with some personal knowledge of the experience and how it affects doc­ toral students. However, one wonders about the im­ portance of even that argument. Its rel­ evance in small colleges already has been refuted. Moreover, even in the largest re­ search libraries, methods of researching and writing a doctorate vary so widely among individuals and among fields, and have changed so much over the past few decades and will continue to change in ways we can only guess at, that the argu­ ment for personal experience is not as powerful as some faculty suggest. At the same time, the process of obtain­ ing a doctorate differs dramatically from that of composing a master’s paper or a master’s thesis. Many of the college librar­ ians in this study have a second master’s degree, so they may have written a master ’s paper in library school and a master’s thesis in their other field, or per­ haps even two theses. But a thesis cannot compare to the research and intellectual rigor that goes into a well-argued and well- written dissertation. A master’s thesis is often written in one or two semesters, with limited off-campus research, whereas a dissertation usually requires years of re­ search and composition. In many humani­ ties fields, that research must be completed in remote or foreign locations. In the physi­ cal sciences, it often involves the use of facilities not available at the student’s home campus. With the average disserta­ tion taking several years to research and write, the difference between a disserta­ tion and a thesis is very clear. The first of James Axtell’s “twenty-five reasons to publish” puts a more positive light on the doctorate and its role in the creation of a faculty member: “The great majority of those who have completed the doctorate consider the most valuable and enjoyable part of their doctoral work not the courses nor the language, comprehen­ sive, and oral exams, but the research for and writing of the dissertation, the last act of their lives as dependent students and the first step toward their intellectual independence as professors.”20 Citing Theodore Ziolkowski, a former graduate TABLE 3 Institutional Statistics by Director's Education Level [Mean average / median average] Gender Enrolled Professionals FTE Library Students in Library Employees Female (n=5) 1,589 / 1,888 6.0 / 6.0 24.7 / 31.4 Ph.D. Male (n=11) 2,029 / 1,301 8.8 / 6.0 30.0 / 21.6 Female (n=11) 1,461 / 1,842 6.8 / 6.0 25.5 / 24.3 MLS & 2nd Master's Male (n-20) 1,613 / 1,293 7.5 / 5.8 25.6 / 24.2 Female (n=17) 1,308 / 1,226 7.8 / 6.3 29.1 / 25.0 MLS Only Male (n=15) 1,363 / 1,225 7.4 / 6.0 26.1 / 21.5 Female (n=33) 1,402 / 1,482 7.2 / 6.0 27.2 / 25.0 Male (n=46) 1,631 / 1,284 7.8 / 6.0 27.0 / 21.5 Total Averages Female & Male (n=79) 1,535 / 1,320 7.5 / 6.0 27.1 / 21.6 The Presence of the Doctorate among Small College Library Directors 407 the administration’sTABLE 4 fervent desire that the Mean and Median Tenure, in Years, of Small library director hold College Directors for Whom Data Were Available, an earned doctorate.Versus Gender and Level of Education Such libraries expect directorship candi-Gender Tenure as Director dates to hold a doctor- Female (n=5) 3.2 / 2.0 ate, though the field in Ph.D. Male (n=11) 13.6 / 13.0 which the doctorate Female (n=11) 5.9 / 5.0 was obtained is irrel- MLS & 2nd master's Male (n=19) 14.8 / 14.0 evant. Various ARL schools have recently Female (n=14) 11.3 / 9.5 hired library directors MLS Only Male (n=15) 12.7 / 13.0 who do not hold doc-Female (n=30) Total Averages Male (n=45) Female & Male (n=75) dean at Princeton, Axtell asserted that the dissertation shows the new Ph.D. how to organize a course and write a good book. Ironically, it is more likely that library di­ rectors at non-doctorate-granting colleges are teaching courses more than library di­ rectors at doctorate-granting universities. As stated previously, one female direc­ tor, responding to the e-mail request for confirmation of data, proposed that the push for increasing the number of women in administrative and directorial positions may have led to an increase in the promo­ tion of women without doctorates. The implication is that few qualified female candidates hold doctorates. This survey’s results do show that twice as many male as female directors hold doctorates, whereas just over 40 percent of the posi­ tions are currently held by women. How­ ever, there should be no lack of women with doctorates: in 1996, 47 percent of U.S. citizens receiving doctorates at American universities were women. In the same year, forty of the forty-nine doctorates granted in library science were earned by women.21 Conclusion The role of the doctorate among library directors is one that clearly raises concern at many institutions. It almost seems as if a reverse correlation exists between an institution’s view of its own reputation and 8.0 / 6.0 torates, an act that has13.8 / 13.0 had little or no nega­ tive effect on the 11.5 / 10.0 institution’s or its library’s reputation. A doctorate in and of itself does not make a library director a success. One could ar­ gue that the doctorate may better prepare a librarian for dealing with students do­ ing doctoral-level research, but that does not happen at Baccalaureate I institutions. Among the directors of selective small colleges, this study found that only 20 percent hold doctorates, and most of those are not in library or information science. Forty percent of these directors hold a second master ’s degree, and just less than 40 percent hold an MLS only. It would appear that small college libraries are not hiring directors with doctorates. There is no significant difference between the size of libraries for those with a doc­ torate and those without. Although administrators, teaching fac­ ulty, and others may continue to call for library directors with doctorates, it is not the doctorate that makes a college librar­ ian a successful administrator and library director. Completing a doctorate does not prepare one for work in college library administration. Though completing a doctorate is an enormous achievement (several directors had done extensive upper-level graduate work or everything but the dissertation but had not com­ pleted the degree), it should not be seen as a requirement for directorship in small or large college libraries. http:women.21 408 College & Research Libraries September 2000 A Ph.D. is a valuable contribution to cannot replace administrative ability, cre­ the library director ’s role and should be ativity, and knowledge in a successful a source of celebration and pride, but it college or university library director. Notes 1. W. Bede Mitchell and Mary Reichel, “Publish or Perish: A Dilemma for Academic Librar­ ians?” College & Research Libraries 60 (May 1999): 232–43. Mitchell and Reichel studied scholar­ ship at institutions classified by the Carnegie Foundation as Research I or II, Doctoral I or II, and Master ’s I or II. The current research focuses, instead, on Baccalaureate I institutions. 2. A cursory study of all directorship advertisements in College & Research Libraries News for 1998 and 1999 found that of ninety-two unique ads for directors of American academic libraries of any size, two required applicants to hold a Ph.D., seventeen stated that a Ph.D. was “desired” or “preferred,” twelve required a second master ’s degree (after the MLS) or a Ph.D., seven pre­ ferred a second master’s or a Ph.D., and twenty-six preferred candidates with an advanced de­ gree after the MLS. Twenty-six did not mention additional educational requirements, and two sought candidates with either an MLS or a Ph.D. 3. Judith Tierney and Terry Mech, “Directors of Small College Libraries in the Northeast: Who Are They?” Technicalities 5 (Jan. 1985): 7–9. 4. Joel Clemmer, “The Liberal Arts College Library Director and the Collegiate Myth,” Jour­ nal of Library Administration 24, no. 3 (1997): 73–88. 5. Julie O’Keeffe, “Small College Library Directors: Getting in the Door and Surviving on the Job,” College & Research Libraries 59 (Mar. 1998): 140–53. 6. John Caldwell, “Degrees Held by Head Librarians of Colleges and Universities,” College & Research Libraries 23 (May 1962): 227–28, 260. 7. Arthur M. McAnally and Robert B. Downs, “The Changing Role of Directors in Univer­ sity Libraries,” College & Research Libraries 34 (Mar. 1973): 103–25. 8. William L. Cohn, “An Overview of ARL Directors, 1933–1973,” College & Research Libraries 37 (Mar. 1976): 137. 9. Jerry L. Parsons, “Characteristics of Research Library Directors, 1958 and 1973,” Wilson Library Bulletin 50 (Apr. 1976): 613–17. 10. Ronald Dale Karr, “The Changing Profile of University Library Directors, 1966–1981,” College & Research Libraries 45 (July 1984): 283. 11. Ibid., 284. 12. William S. Wong and David S. Zubatsky, “The Tenure Rate of University Library Direc­ tors: A 1983 Survey,” College & Research Libraries 46 (Jan. 1985): 69–77. 13. Marcia J. Myers and Paula T. Kaufman, “ARL Directors: Two Decades of Change,” College & Research Libraries 52 (May 1991): 241–54. 14. O’Keeffe, “Small College Library Directors.” 15. Ibid., 151. 16. Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, A Classification of Institutions of Higher Education, 1994 Edition (Princeton, N.J.: Carnegie Foundation, 1994). 17. National Center for Education Statistics, Preliminary 1996 Academic Library Data [subset of Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System] (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Educa­ tion, 1997). Available online at: http://nces.ed.gov/Ipeds/aclib96.html. Barron’s Profiles of Ameri­ can Colleges, 22nd ed. (Hauppauge, N.Y.: Barron’s, 1997). 18. The other fields in which doctorates were earned are American studies, history, classical philology, religion, philosophy, and English and American literature. 19. See note 2, above, for specific results data. 20. James Axtell, “Twenty-five Reasons to Publish,” Journal of Scholarly Publishing 29 (Oct. 1997): 6. 21. Peter H. Henderson, Julie E. Clarke, and Cynthia Woods, Summary Report 1996: Doctorate Recipients from United States Universities (Washington, D.C.: National Academy Pr., 1998), 67. http://nces.ed.gov/Ipeds/aclib96.html