CENTRAL CIRCULATION BOOKSTACKS 
 
 The person charging this material is re- 
 sponsible for its return to the library from 
 which it was borrowed on or before the 
 Latest Date stamped below. 
 
 Theft/ mutilation/ and underlining of books are reasons 
 for disciplinary action and may result in dismissal from 
 the University. 
 
 TO RENEW CALL TELEPHONE CENTER, 333-8400 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS LIBRARY AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN 
 
 m i> t i$m 
 
 '•APR- 24- 
 
 1 . KM t'4 
 
 Cla 
 
 m M u 8 1994 
 
 When renewing by phone, write new due date below 
 previous due date. L162 
 
[Reprinted from A. L. A. Bulletin, Conference Number, 1911 ] 
 
 THE ACADEMIC STANDING OF COLLEGE LIBRARY ASSISTANTS AND 
 THEIR RELATION TO THE CARNEGIE FOUNDATION * 
 
 By W. E. HENRY, Librarian of the University of Washington Library 
 
 In taking up this topic for consideration 
 we must realize that we are dealing with 
 | a new profession in educational work, that 
 j this profession is an outgrowth of new 
 ! conceptions in educational materials and 
 /processes and that the terms and condi- 
 i tions are fixed by these materials and 
 j processes. We must, therefore, treat 
 ' briefly certain origins before coming spe- 
 | cifically to the apparent topic. 
 
 This new relationship expressed in the 
 i words “college library assistant” came 
 upon us unawares as a part of recent evo- 
 I lution in the conceptions of education — 
 new conceptions of studentship and schol- 
 arship. 
 
 I This new learning of less than fifty 
 | years is characterized by broad scope, 
 i searching investigation, infinite detail, 
 
 I first hand authority and such variety as 
 i would have been bewildering a few years 
 j earlier. The old learning wrote the natu- 
 | ral history of the world from Adam; the 
 ) new learning writes volumes on bacteriob 
 ogy, and the new library is as unlike the 
 old as the books they contain. They pre- 
 sent precisely the same differences. 
 
 The type of student that uses books and 
 in turn produces them is less than half a 
 century old. The mass of books that con- 
 stitute the working collection of most 
 American college libraries have been writ- 
 ten since the American library association 
 held its first session in 1876. The “new 
 learning” covers the half century after 
 1860. In 1876 there were but three college 
 libraries in America that contained more 
 than 45,000 volumes each; only one pos- 
 sessed more than 100,000 volumes. Very 
 few professors placed Ph.D. after their 
 names in the college catalog, and this 
 growth of these two facts since then may 
 be traced side by side as interchanging 
 cause and effect — a new studentship and a 
 new library. The new learning demanded 
 detailed information “ready to serve hot,” 
 therefore a new well-organized library. 
 7he new library is a hundred times more 
 
 varied than the old. The more varied li- 
 brary has the greater variety of function 
 and demands more perfect organization as 
 in all forms of organic life. This higher 
 type and more complex organization origi- 
 nates the demand for the modern library 
 assistant, and fixes the condition in educa- 
 tion and training. 
 
 In the old college library there were 
 relatively few subjects, few authors, 
 few investigations, few readers, few de- 
 mands of any kind. The new learning 
 fixed the standards for the new profession. 
 Breadth of scholarship, detail of informa- 
 tion, cosmopolitan and comprehensive, 
 were demanded, and all of it ready on call. 
 Compare the college curriculum of 1876 
 with that of the present. The librarian 
 in the old college library becomes the staff 
 in the new; one becomes many, and the 
 college library assistant comes into being. 
 
 In the older pedagogy the teacher did 
 mere textbook recitation work or occa- 
 sionally did worse by lecturing, but there 
 was almost no thought of bibliographical 
 work in connection with the recitation as- 
 signments. He needed no library service, 
 hence no library nor librarian. The new 
 pedagogy values the work done in the li- 
 brary as quite as vital and more informing 
 than that of the class room. No subject 
 is well treated now until a fair bibliog- 
 raphy of the subject is mastered. Here the 
 librarian is quite as necessary as the 
 teacher and quite as helpful. Neither 
 could do his work without the other. Co- 
 operation has become a necessity, and the 
 preparation of the two is essentially simi- 
 lar, in slightly different directions, but 
 complementary. The library staff must be 
 the equals in scholarship and preparation 
 of the faculty of any one academic depart- 
 ment, and if it is not so the library will fall 
 short of the work that ought to be done in 
 cooperative education. 
 
 The reference librarian must needs pos- 
 sess a larger grasp of information than is 
 expected of any professor, for this member 
 
 * Reprinted and distributed by vote of the College and reference section of the American Library Association. 
 
of the staff must know in general all that 
 all the faculty knows in detail. The lend- 
 ing librarian, if she does her whole duty, 
 must know the book resources as well as 
 the combined faculty knows them. It has 
 been said that the girl who can measure 
 ribbon over the counter at three dollars 
 per week can hand out books at the same 
 price. My own belief is that the readiest 
 and best informed mind as well as the best 
 business head in the staff is none too good 
 for the loan desk, and the work of other 
 departments could be shown relatively as 
 important in the particular fields. 
 
 The member of the faculty obtains his 
 rank in part because of his academic prep- 
 aration, and in part because he has to do 
 with directing the education of others. His 
 work in the education of others is some- 
 times in the actual processes of teaching, 
 — the hearing of recitations, lecturing, di- 
 recting the reading, or it may be largely in 
 mere administrative work. This rank, 
 so f^r as it depends upon academic prepa- 
 ration is usually indicated by a degree 
 granted from some institution. This de- 
 gree means that he has completed a cer- 
 tain course of instruction but does not in- 
 dicate that he can do any particular kind 
 or grade of service. In short, his rank is 
 evidence of scholarly relationship. Meas- 
 ured by these tests, which I believe to be 
 fair, the members of the library staff bear 
 a very similar relation to educational ac- 
 tivities. We do not think of a college li- 
 brary assistant coming to his position on 
 the staff on any other basis than one of 
 general scholarship, and not usually with- 
 out some special training for the work he 
 assumes, either in a library training school 
 or valuable experience in a well-managed 
 library. The professor has not usually a 
 training for his work as a teacher, how- 
 ever much he may have in scholarship. 
 The library assistant is not usually a 
 teacher in the sense of a hearer of recita- 
 tions or a formal lecturer, yet anyone who 
 knows his real work must admit that it is 
 frequently as personal and quite as scho- 
 lastically helpful as that done by the 
 teacher. If this equality does not exist 
 then the staff should be revised. With 
 such preparation and such relationship to 
 the educational processes I shall claim 
 that the library staff must rank with the 
 faculty or teaching staff of any depart- 
 ment. The librarian or head of the staff 
 should have the rank and pay of a pro- 
 fessor; the assistant librarian, if such a 
 
 title for a distinct position exists, should 
 be accorded the rank and pay of an asso- 
 ciate professor; and the other members of 
 the staff that of assistant professor or in- 
 structor, this to be determined by the 
 nature of the work, the preparation and 
 particular ability required; and those not 
 fitted to so rank should not be members 
 of the staff but some other name should 
 be adopted. 
 
 I am sure that this doctrine will sound 
 a bit revolutionary and somewhat like the 
 closed shop to persons who have been ac- 
 customed to think of the library staff 
 along with janitors and scrubwomen, but 
 to me librarianship is a learned profession 
 and in college must rank with the teaching 
 profession. As before defined, I do not in- 
 clude in the library staff mere student as- 
 sistants uneducated and untrained persons 
 in the most subordinate position. The staff 
 must be respected as educators by the fac- 
 ulty, not merely for the satisfaction of the 
 staff but for the good of the library in its 
 power for efficiency. 
 
 It would have been infinitely more fort- 
 unate for colleges in their library adminis- 
 tration if instead of the word “librarian” 
 the title Professor of books and reading 
 had been substituted as suggested in the 
 “Special report on public libraries” in 1876. 
 Mr. Perkins in that report emphasizes the 
 doctrine that the office of librarian shall 
 be “a professorship teaching method,” not 
 subject; how to discover, not what to dis- 
 cover. Mr. Matthews in the same report, 
 bore upon the thesis that the college 
 should provide “a professor to assist the 
 student.” These men back in the early 
 age of modern librarianship outlined pre- 
 cisely the duty of a modern college li- 
 brary staff — to assist the student in the 
 method of discovery. Each member of a 
 well organized staff holds a professorship 
 or an instructorship in the department of 
 books and reading. 
 
 As I have thought over the peculiar mis- 
 sion of each member of the staff I am per- 
 suaded that each is vitally essential to the 
 work of the professorship of books and 
 reading. The person who selects the book, 
 the one who catalogs it, is just as vitally, 
 though less directly, helping the student as 
 is the one who hands him the book with 
 the page designated. 
 
 Then, in the department of books and 
 reading we have precisely the relationship 
 and must demand the scholarship and spe 
 chic training as is demanded in the depart- . 
 
 2 
 
ents of history, English, German, or en- 
 gineering. The library staff must rank 
 with the teaching staff of a given depart- 
 ment, for the instructor and guide in meth- 
 od of scholarship bears the same vital re- 
 lation to the education of the student as 
 does the guide in matters of scholarship. 
 
 For comparative relations the term “Pro- 
 fessor of books and reading” is much more 
 significant than “Librarian,” for the latter 
 term has brought with it the suggestion of 
 the inactive police relation of a keeper of 
 books, while the former has in it the impli- 
 cation of active help — of progressive edu- 
 cational purpose. I do not mean that it 
 would be wise to change the name of this 
 office in the college catalog, but I use it 
 here with the hope that I may make the 
 relationship clearer and thereby place the 
 library staff where I think it belongs in ed- 
 ucational economy. 
 
 Whatever may be said of individual per- 
 sons or positions as to requirement it is 
 clear that so far there exists no uniform- 
 ity of appreciation or organization within 
 the college library staff. We are not 
 agreed among ourselves as to how many 
 and what departments naturally and logi- 
 cally exist, and the term “Head of the 
 Department” has a great variety of indefi- 
 nite meanings. There is likewise no de- 
 fined notion as to the essential require- 
 ments for heads of certain departments, 
 there is neither uniformity nor consistency 
 of names for college library assistants; 
 and finally there is no fixed conception as 
 to just what constitutes a library staff. 
 Does staff include only heads of depart- 
 ments with the librarian, or does it include 
 assistants in the departments as well as 
 student assistants or even pages? These 
 questions must be answered and the no- 
 menclature fixed before the questions of 
 this paper can be fully and satisfactorily 
 answered. We shall not be ranked out- 
 side of the staff until we rank within it. 
 If, however, we desire and expect the li- 
 brary staff to rank with the teaching staff 
 of a department we must demand acade- 
 mic and professional preparation and a 
 kind and quality of work that will com- 
 mand respect from the faculty and from 
 others having knowledge of college rank 
 ^nd standing. Their work must be pro- 
 fessional and educational. 
 
 Admission to the staff of a college li- 
 brary must demand at least the bachelor’s 
 degree and added thereto should be the 
 training of a library school preferably cul- 
 
 minating in a professional degree; or, in 
 lieu of school training, such experience 
 in library work as shall leave no question 
 of capacity or efficiency. 
 
 It is true that in a large staff there is 
 much petty detail that, for economic rea- 
 sons, well prepared people cannot afford 
 to perform. A considerable per cent of 
 any large staff will be composed of lower 
 grade relatively untrained persons who 
 cannot and ought not attain to faculty 
 rank. These I should not consider as 
 members of the staff but should provide 
 some other title such as helper or attend- 
 ant, and let that title become definite and 
 fixed. 
 
 Let us make our staff a very specific and 
 very exclusive body clearly defined in the 
 minds of all having official relation to the 
 institution. Let the line be distinctly 
 drawn but not snobbishly maintained. Let 
 us classify closely on the basis of prepa- 
 ration and demonstrated efficiency and 
 then be exacting in our nomenclature. I 
 have pointed out upon purely historical 
 and theoretical grounds what should be 
 the academic rank of the college library 
 assistant. I shall briefly state the theory 
 of this same assistant’s relation to the Car- 
 negie Foundation for the Advancement of 
 Teaching and follow up this theoretical 
 statement with a few facts as to what con- 
 ditions do actually prevail with regard to 
 both of these questions in a dozen repre- 
 sentative institutions in all parts of the 
 country. 
 
 Whatever reasons may have prevailed 
 for admitting teachers in any college or 
 university faculty to retiring allowances 
 from the Carnegie Foundation are equally 
 valid when applied to the library staff, not 
 perhaps as it is now constituted in many 
 cases, but as above defined. If present af- 
 fluence be the measure then I am sure the 
 librarian has equal claim with the profes- 
 sor. If the insufficiency of salary either in 
 fact or in prospect be taken in evidence 
 then I am sure no professor could urge a 
 stronger claim than can the library assist- 
 ant. If a long and faithful service be a 
 condition, then the library staff must stand 
 side by side with the professor inviting the 
 generosity of the Foundation. If single- 
 ness of purpose and devoted service be the 
 test then the library assistant admits no 
 superior. If scholarly requirements and 
 extensive preparation are to be considered 
 evidence of fitness there is no difference. 
 As valiant and efficient helpers in the pro- 
 
 3 
 
cess and progress of higher education I 
 know of no claim that will admit one to 
 the privileges of the Foundation and deny 
 the same to the other. 
 
 From any point of view I cannot see a 
 single argument that will admit the assist- 
 ant professor and the instructor to par- 
 ticipate in the foundation that will deny 
 the library assistant when the library staff 
 shall be composed on as high standards of 
 efficiency as the teaching staff. It then 
 becomes the business of the college libra- 
 rians to define carefully, through the exec- 
 utive authorities of the colleges, the library 
 staff and the qualifications demanded, and 
 to see to it that only such persons are ad- 
 mitted. 
 
 What conditions now prevail in college 
 libraries? In preparing this paper I tried 
 to collect facts from college and univer- 
 sity libraries covering the entire country 
 form east to west, including both state and 
 endowed institutions. From seventeen in- 
 quiries I had sixteen replies for which I 
 sincerely thank the responding libraries. 
 Only about 43 per cent of those persons 
 now holding positions as college library as- 
 sistants hold even baccalaureate degrees. 
 About 20 per cent have had some library 
 school training, a considerable proportion 
 of these hold the B. L. S. degree. 
 
 As to faculty rank it appears that the 
 librarian usually has the rank of a pro- 
 fessor. Below the librarian all sorts of 
 conditions prevail. In one instance all 
 members of the staff are considered mem- 
 bers of the faculty, yet less than half of 
 them have any degree. The reference li- 
 brarian ranks as instructor, and all below 
 him rank with the lowest grade of the 
 teaching force. I do not find what that 
 rank is. Below the librarian and a first 
 assistant there seems to be no faculty rank 
 in most cases. With the above figures as 
 to preparation it is not at all surprising 
 that most assistants have no rank. 
 
 As to the relation to the Carnegie Foun- 
 dation, usually the librarian and assistant 
 seem to be eligible to a retiring allowance, 
 as these usually have some professional 
 rank. However, the term “assistant libra- 
 rian” is used without discrimination. In 
 some instances it means a specific rank 
 next the head of the staff, but in quite a 
 number of cases it seems to apply to 
 almost any person working in the library. 
 The library assistant is so far scarcely 
 considered. 
 
 For reasons of internal organization and 
 
 external respect and proper standing, I 
 am convinced we must standardize our 
 college libraries just as the colleges and 
 universities are being standardized under 
 the guiding and commanding influence of 
 the Carnegie Foundation. I wish that 
 some one would recommend that a com- 
 mittee from this organization might be 
 appointed to take up the work of standard- 
 izing the college library force, and make 
 recommendations as to staff organizations, 
 qualifications of members of the staff and 
 nomenclature that some time in the fu- 
 ture we may have a common language. 
 
 I can bring to you at this time three 
 guiding facts for our future action; the 
 ruling of the Foundation itself and the 
 action of two of our leading universities 
 — Columbia and Harvard. That portion of 
 rule five of the Carnegie Foundation which 
 provides for librarians participating in the 
 retiring allowance reads as follows: “Li- 
 brarians, registrars, recorders, and admin- 
 istrative officers of long tenure whose sal- 
 aries may be classed with those of profes- 
 sors are considered eligible to the benefits 
 of a retiring allowance.” Now, whether 
 librarian means head of the staff only, or 
 whether it means a number of persons 
 doing the higher quality of library work 
 may be questioned since some assistants 
 in libraries have been granted allowances. 
 Yet in a letter from the secretary of the 
 Foundation under date of April 1, 1911, 
 this sentence occurs, “Ordinarily we have 
 not considered that assistant librarians 
 might count their service toward a retir- 
 ing allowance,” yet later in the same letter 
 this writer makes the possible exception 
 of such large libraries as Columbia and 
 Harvard. 
 
 The Harvard rules for retiring allow- 
 ances specify that “librarians and assist- 
 ant librarians” are covered by the provis- 
 ion. Assistant librarian at Harvard is hot 
 a specific single position but applies to 
 two persons of equal rank. 
 
 The Columbia university trustees on 
 February 6 of this year provided as fol- 
 lows: “The librarian shall have the rank 
 of professor, the assistant librarian that of 
 associate professor, and the supervisors 
 (with grade of assistant librarian) shall 
 rank as assistant professors and bibliogra-, 
 phers as instructors.” The action of these! 
 two great leading universities is so specifici 
 and well defined and apparently so just I\ 
 quote from them as a guide which the rest 
 of us may follow if even at some distance. 
 
 4