- Email: [email protected]
Academic libraries over twenty-five years
Academic Libraries over Twenty-five Years by Edward G. Halley
I
n cleaning out my tiles recently, I came across remarks that I had made at the University of Houston on “The Politics of Higher Education” in 197 1, just prior to my move to the deanship at Chapel Hill in January 1972. I had returned from a semester-long study of urban university libraries and was asked to share my observations with university colleagues in the Sunday Evening Club, which met, by the way, once a month, at Friday noon! Dealing with the politics of higher education was and is quite a challenge. My remarks came as the tremendous emphasis on higher education during the 1960s was beginning to fade. The Carnegie Commission on Higher Education completed its work and the final volumes were soon to appear. What I thought my faculty colleagues needed to understand was that universities, especially publicly-supported ones, have always been involved in the political process. Both they and others needed to acknowledge that reality. In the intervening years, most faculties have had to come to grips with the fact that such strong support would not last forever. The 196Os, under the presidencies of Kennedy and Johnson, saw tremendous expansion of scholarship, publishing, libraries, and laboratories. The number of students and faculty increased dramatically. Student enrollment went from 2.7 million in 1955, to 5.5 million in 1965, and 9 million in 1975. By 1995, enrollment approached 15 million. Former colleges, especially publicly-supported ones, overnight became universities by order of the legislature. Libraries benefited greatly not only from increased state and federal support but also from private donors. Nonetheless, librarians often complained that fiscal resources were never sufficient to carry out their mission. They were right. However, compared to previous support, they were fortunate indeed. The bloom came off the rose about as quickly as it had opened. At the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA),
Edward
C. Halley
The University Information
of
is William North
Rand Kenan, )r. Professor
Carolina
and Library Science,
at
Chapel
CB#3360,
Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27599-33360
100
Hi//,
Emeritus, School
Manning
of
Hall,
.
The Journal of Academic Librarianship, Volume 25, Number 2, pages 79-81
both I and the earthquake hit the state about the same time. There was no apparent connection between the two! The UCLA Chancellor announced that 90 faculty positions would be eliminated by the fall. Governor Reagan had already decreed that there would be no faculty raises, which would mean a third year of no salary increases. Similar situations took place in Minnesota and Illinois. From my visits to all of these places, I came away with a view that the American public generally was favorable to higher education. What many critics seemed to be saying was that they did not like what was going on at the campus, wanted more attention paid to needs of their children, and wanted less emphasis on research. I doubt that the public understood the implications of their views. Student unrest was surely a significant feature in all of this unhappiness, especially after the death of Martin Luther King. What about academic libraries during this period? Many of the newly created universities struggled to create teaching and research collections to support burgeoning undergraduate enrollments and new faculty. New universities, such as those in California and New York, had to create instant research collections. In most cases, library staffs and book funds were increased substantially but not necessarily in that order. Librarians struggled to accommodate the needs of the latest hired scholar whose interest might be Brazil, or the Central American countries, or the Union of the Soviet Socialist Republics, areas to which little attention had been given heretofore. As a library director during the 1960s I knew that higher education would never go back to ignoring what the public wanted in higher education. I also knew that the pattern of support for research, continuing education, and service to society would not be ignored, even by its harshest critics. The federal government, under its World War II policies of contracting out for research projects for national needs, continued supporting research “in the national interests,” after the war was over. Federal government support, both for military personnel and trained researchers in the sciences, continued at more modest levels and, eventually, for other types of research as well. The net result was more research, especially at the university level,
March 1999
79
and a system of subsidizing faculty in pursuing their own research interests. What had this to do with libraries? Quite a lot. As a result of research activities, libraries were constantly trying to keep up with the enormous output of scholars, especially those who had fewer national security problems with which to deal. This was especially true in medicine, but also in various branches of science. Sociology benefited substantially, as did some humanities programs. However, the humanities and social sciences generally did not have the kind of massive amounts of money the federal government routinely spent on research for medicine and the sciences. Nonetheless, one can certainly say that federal support for diverse research activity became a problem for librarians as they coped with the massive amount of publication and the spiraling costs in serials. Unfortunately, many librarians still have little understanding of how research productivity has brought about fundamental changes in distributing scholarship among themselves and others needing the results of their efforts. How does this relate to libraries? I start with the general principle that libraries and librarians are indispensable in providing access to a wide range of literature important for academic programs, especially at research universities. Not only do they have responsibility for acquiring massive amounts of material worldwide, but also are responsible for making available all of the scholarly activity they can possibly manage. And, managing is a major part of this activity, never more so than with the advent of the computer. As one looks back at how the profession managed the literature of all this research material, she or he can point not only to the vast array of human knowledge, but also to the sophisticated ways in which we acquire and categorize specific literatures. By no means should we overlook the librarians themselves. Where once we might add persons without the professional degree, that degree is now required often along with additional formal education as well as workshops, conferences, etc., so we can keep abreast of what is happening in various fields. That means, of course, that we have to deal with the proliferation of journals, short courses, retreats, conferences, and other means of keeping up to date. This is no small achievement, especially in the light of the technological explosion. One hopes that new technology may find ways to deal with the overload of material with which most of us deal daily. When the first ALA Yearbook appeared in 1976, there was concern over the “new depression in higher education.” While true that the funds were not what they had been a decade earlier, new academic library buildings were being dedicated and librarians were increasing their emphasis on cooperation. New directors were replacing the old, and bibliographic networks were thriving. A decade later new buildings continued to be built, including the Davis Library at the University of North Carolina (UNC) and the O’Neil Library at Boston College. Thanks to a Chancellor at UNC, who had the good fortune to sell the utilities, most of the $40 million was directed for a new graduate research library, expanding the undergraduate library, and renovating the old Wilson Library for special collections. To my knowledge, no other university had such a glorious windfall. UNC was not alone; new library buildings continued to be built at many other colleges and universities in the next two decades. So much for the demise of the academic library. Among librarians, the old group of leaders was retiring and new leaders took their place, especially women librarians. In
80
The Journal of Academic Librarianship
the east, Millicent “Penny” Able became librarian at Yale University, while Kaye Gapen assumed the directorship at the University of Wisconsin, Madison. Librarians continued to lament their lack of adequate salaries and compensation. They were right. Some did better than others. Affirmative action was unquestionably a boon for women and minorities, especially at public institutions where the universities were more susceptible to receipt of those glorious research dollars from the federal government. The advent of the computer and changes in deans at a variety of library/information science schools resulted in the demise of some schools and the strengthening of others. One issue in which this former dean was involved was the attack on the professional qualifications of librarians in academia. Two court cases in Mississippi and Louisiana, in 1984, settled the matter that, yes, a college or university does have the right to impose the requirement of an American Library Association (ALA) accredited master’s degree for its professional positions. Academic leaders, for the most part, have always tried to obtain the best candidates for their professional positions. They are often hampered by inadequate financial resources. Nonetheless, as one looks back over 25 years. it is clear that progress has been made. One important element in staffing has been a recognition that not all positions in libraries require professional credentials. Thus, there has been a considerable increase in reliance on support staff, which demand, quite rightly, that their work ought to be recognized with their own appropriate salary schedules. All of the above issues seem to have arisen time and again during the last 25 years. Among the new outlets for scholarship was the Journal of Academic Librarianship, whose publication has become critically important for academic librarians. No less than other professionals, librarians have benefited from many new publications. Where once there were only two scholarly journals in our field, College & Research Libraries and Library Quarterly, they have been joined, in the last 2.5 years, by a number of specialized journals dealing with various facets of our profession, for instance, Libraries und Culture, formerly the Journal of Library History, which has improved markedly over its earlier incarnation. Now, it is a refereed journal that commands respect from other historians. Even some nonlibrarian historians attend library history conferences which are held at a different university every five years. The newer converts usually express surprise at the quality of the programs. Given the above comments, let me now turn to the Journal ofAcademic Librarianship (JAL). When Richard Dougherty told me of his and William Webb’s intention to begin a new journal, I asked him if he really thought there was a need for yet one more journal in our field. We already had Library Quarterly and College & Research Libraries (CARL). He responded that he knew there was a need from his period as editor of C&RL where he had received more well researched articles than he could accept. What was needed was a different kind of journal. He stated this purpose clearly in the March 1975 issue of JA L, academic librarianship has matured to the point where significantly-increased dialog between professionals through scholarly exchange is both necessary and inevitable. We [he and cofounder William Webb] believe that academic librarianship
will benefit from an independent journal which can address the problems confronting our profession.’ Five years later Webb repeated the objectives
Dougherty l
l
he and
had in mind in the beginning:
To enhance the dialog among librarians administrators; To critique but contribute librarianship;
and educational
to renewed understanding
l
To reflect on important professional
l
To hope for insight into who and what we are.2
concerns;
of
and
To the great surprise of many of us, JAL soon had almost 3,000 subscribers and ranked highest in per copy readership according to an ALA survey. In many ways, JAL has provided a different approach to our literature. Early on one of its features included abbreviated reviews of journal articles as well as other literature on academic libraries and higher education. The latter is an especially important contribution for academic librarians, since it is our responsibility to keep up with what is being discussed by other academicians. In addition to articles dealing with academic librarianship, JAL, has, from the beginning, had an important book review
section which often includes books on higher education. But the most important section, from this reviewer’s perspective, is “The JAL Guide to the Professional Literature.” That guide is more than the literature of librarianship. JAL also includes those subjects which many librarians so easily ignore: higher education, personnel development, information technology, and so forth. The brief summaries of articles from other disciplines related to higher education constitute a wealth of information in succinct form which the academic librarian needs but cannot afford the time and effort to peruse on a regular basis. This alone is sufficient reason for subscribing to JAL. The current editor-in-chief, Peter Hemon, and editor, Gloriana St. Clair, continue that tradition of publishing scholarship with upto-date thoughtful articles for academic librarians. As one who has been a subscriber for all of those years, and was for a long time on the advisory board, I will continue to look forward to reading and learning from one of the profession’s best journals. Best wishes for its continued success. REFERENCES 1. Richard M. Dougherty & William H. Webb, “Uncertain Times,” Journal of Academic Librarianship I (March 1975): 3. 2. William H. Webb, “Certain Times,” Journal qf Academic Librarianship 6 (March 1980): 3.
March 1999
81
I
n cleaning out my tiles recently, I came across remarks that I had made at the University of Houston on “The Politics of Higher Education” in 197 1, just prior to my move to the deanship at Chapel Hill in January 1972. I had returned from a semester-long study of urban university libraries and was asked to share my observations with university colleagues in the Sunday Evening Club, which met, by the way, once a month, at Friday noon! Dealing with the politics of higher education was and is quite a challenge. My remarks came as the tremendous emphasis on higher education during the 1960s was beginning to fade. The Carnegie Commission on Higher Education completed its work and the final volumes were soon to appear. What I thought my faculty colleagues needed to understand was that universities, especially publicly-supported ones, have always been involved in the political process. Both they and others needed to acknowledge that reality. In the intervening years, most faculties have had to come to grips with the fact that such strong support would not last forever. The 196Os, under the presidencies of Kennedy and Johnson, saw tremendous expansion of scholarship, publishing, libraries, and laboratories. The number of students and faculty increased dramatically. Student enrollment went from 2.7 million in 1955, to 5.5 million in 1965, and 9 million in 1975. By 1995, enrollment approached 15 million. Former colleges, especially publicly-supported ones, overnight became universities by order of the legislature. Libraries benefited greatly not only from increased state and federal support but also from private donors. Nonetheless, librarians often complained that fiscal resources were never sufficient to carry out their mission. They were right. However, compared to previous support, they were fortunate indeed. The bloom came off the rose about as quickly as it had opened. At the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA),
Edward
C. Halley
The University Information
of
is William North
Rand Kenan, )r. Professor
Carolina
and Library Science,
at
Chapel
CB#3360,
Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27599-33360
100
Hi//,
Emeritus, School
Manning
of
Hall,
The Journal of Academic Librarianship, Volume 25, Number 2, pages 79-81
both I and the earthquake hit the state about the same time. There was no apparent connection between the two! The UCLA Chancellor announced that 90 faculty positions would be eliminated by the fall. Governor Reagan had already decreed that there would be no faculty raises, which would mean a third year of no salary increases. Similar situations took place in Minnesota and Illinois. From my visits to all of these places, I came away with a view that the American public generally was favorable to higher education. What many critics seemed to be saying was that they did not like what was going on at the campus, wanted more attention paid to needs of their children, and wanted less emphasis on research. I doubt that the public understood the implications of their views. Student unrest was surely a significant feature in all of this unhappiness, especially after the death of Martin Luther King. What about academic libraries during this period? Many of the newly created universities struggled to create teaching and research collections to support burgeoning undergraduate enrollments and new faculty. New universities, such as those in California and New York, had to create instant research collections. In most cases, library staffs and book funds were increased substantially but not necessarily in that order. Librarians struggled to accommodate the needs of the latest hired scholar whose interest might be Brazil, or the Central American countries, or the Union of the Soviet Socialist Republics, areas to which little attention had been given heretofore. As a library director during the 1960s I knew that higher education would never go back to ignoring what the public wanted in higher education. I also knew that the pattern of support for research, continuing education, and service to society would not be ignored, even by its harshest critics. The federal government, under its World War II policies of contracting out for research projects for national needs, continued supporting research “in the national interests,” after the war was over. Federal government support, both for military personnel and trained researchers in the sciences, continued at more modest levels and, eventually, for other types of research as well. The net result was more research, especially at the university level,
March 1999
79
and a system of subsidizing faculty in pursuing their own research interests. What had this to do with libraries? Quite a lot. As a result of research activities, libraries were constantly trying to keep up with the enormous output of scholars, especially those who had fewer national security problems with which to deal. This was especially true in medicine, but also in various branches of science. Sociology benefited substantially, as did some humanities programs. However, the humanities and social sciences generally did not have the kind of massive amounts of money the federal government routinely spent on research for medicine and the sciences. Nonetheless, one can certainly say that federal support for diverse research activity became a problem for librarians as they coped with the massive amount of publication and the spiraling costs in serials. Unfortunately, many librarians still have little understanding of how research productivity has brought about fundamental changes in distributing scholarship among themselves and others needing the results of their efforts. How does this relate to libraries? I start with the general principle that libraries and librarians are indispensable in providing access to a wide range of literature important for academic programs, especially at research universities. Not only do they have responsibility for acquiring massive amounts of material worldwide, but also are responsible for making available all of the scholarly activity they can possibly manage. And, managing is a major part of this activity, never more so than with the advent of the computer. As one looks back at how the profession managed the literature of all this research material, she or he can point not only to the vast array of human knowledge, but also to the sophisticated ways in which we acquire and categorize specific literatures. By no means should we overlook the librarians themselves. Where once we might add persons without the professional degree, that degree is now required often along with additional formal education as well as workshops, conferences, etc., so we can keep abreast of what is happening in various fields. That means, of course, that we have to deal with the proliferation of journals, short courses, retreats, conferences, and other means of keeping up to date. This is no small achievement, especially in the light of the technological explosion. One hopes that new technology may find ways to deal with the overload of material with which most of us deal daily. When the first ALA Yearbook appeared in 1976, there was concern over the “new depression in higher education.” While true that the funds were not what they had been a decade earlier, new academic library buildings were being dedicated and librarians were increasing their emphasis on cooperation. New directors were replacing the old, and bibliographic networks were thriving. A decade later new buildings continued to be built, including the Davis Library at the University of North Carolina (UNC) and the O’Neil Library at Boston College. Thanks to a Chancellor at UNC, who had the good fortune to sell the utilities, most of the $40 million was directed for a new graduate research library, expanding the undergraduate library, and renovating the old Wilson Library for special collections. To my knowledge, no other university had such a glorious windfall. UNC was not alone; new library buildings continued to be built at many other colleges and universities in the next two decades. So much for the demise of the academic library. Among librarians, the old group of leaders was retiring and new leaders took their place, especially women librarians. In
80
The Journal of Academic Librarianship
the east, Millicent “Penny” Able became librarian at Yale University, while Kaye Gapen assumed the directorship at the University of Wisconsin, Madison. Librarians continued to lament their lack of adequate salaries and compensation. They were right. Some did better than others. Affirmative action was unquestionably a boon for women and minorities, especially at public institutions where the universities were more susceptible to receipt of those glorious research dollars from the federal government. The advent of the computer and changes in deans at a variety of library/information science schools resulted in the demise of some schools and the strengthening of others. One issue in which this former dean was involved was the attack on the professional qualifications of librarians in academia. Two court cases in Mississippi and Louisiana, in 1984, settled the matter that, yes, a college or university does have the right to impose the requirement of an American Library Association (ALA) accredited master’s degree for its professional positions. Academic leaders, for the most part, have always tried to obtain the best candidates for their professional positions. They are often hampered by inadequate financial resources. Nonetheless, as one looks back over 25 years. it is clear that progress has been made. One important element in staffing has been a recognition that not all positions in libraries require professional credentials. Thus, there has been a considerable increase in reliance on support staff, which demand, quite rightly, that their work ought to be recognized with their own appropriate salary schedules. All of the above issues seem to have arisen time and again during the last 25 years. Among the new outlets for scholarship was the Journal of Academic Librarianship, whose publication has become critically important for academic librarians. No less than other professionals, librarians have benefited from many new publications. Where once there were only two scholarly journals in our field, College & Research Libraries and Library Quarterly, they have been joined, in the last 2.5 years, by a number of specialized journals dealing with various facets of our profession, for instance, Libraries und Culture, formerly the Journal of Library History, which has improved markedly over its earlier incarnation. Now, it is a refereed journal that commands respect from other historians. Even some nonlibrarian historians attend library history conferences which are held at a different university every five years. The newer converts usually express surprise at the quality of the programs. Given the above comments, let me now turn to the Journal ofAcademic Librarianship (JAL). When Richard Dougherty told me of his and William Webb’s intention to begin a new journal, I asked him if he really thought there was a need for yet one more journal in our field. We already had Library Quarterly and College & Research Libraries (CARL). He responded that he knew there was a need from his period as editor of C&RL where he had received more well researched articles than he could accept. What was needed was a different kind of journal. He stated this purpose clearly in the March 1975 issue of JA L, academic librarianship has matured to the point where significantly-increased dialog between professionals through scholarly exchange is both necessary and inevitable. We [he and cofounder William Webb] believe that academic librarianship
will benefit from an independent journal which can address the problems confronting our profession.’ Five years later Webb repeated the objectives
Dougherty l
l
he and
had in mind in the beginning:
To enhance the dialog among librarians administrators; To critique but contribute librarianship;
and educational
to renewed understanding
l
To reflect on important professional
l
To hope for insight into who and what we are.2
concerns;
of
and
To the great surprise of many of us, JAL soon had almost 3,000 subscribers and ranked highest in per copy readership according to an ALA survey. In many ways, JAL has provided a different approach to our literature. Early on one of its features included abbreviated reviews of journal articles as well as other literature on academic libraries and higher education. The latter is an especially important contribution for academic librarians, since it is our responsibility to keep up with what is being discussed by other academicians. In addition to articles dealing with academic librarianship, JAL, has, from the beginning, had an important book review
section which often includes books on higher education. But the most important section, from this reviewer’s perspective, is “The JAL Guide to the Professional Literature.” That guide is more than the literature of librarianship. JAL also includes those subjects which many librarians so easily ignore: higher education, personnel development, information technology, and so forth. The brief summaries of articles from other disciplines related to higher education constitute a wealth of information in succinct form which the academic librarian needs but cannot afford the time and effort to peruse on a regular basis. This alone is sufficient reason for subscribing to JAL. The current editor-in-chief, Peter Hemon, and editor, Gloriana St. Clair, continue that tradition of publishing scholarship with upto-date thoughtful articles for academic librarians. As one who has been a subscriber for all of those years, and was for a long time on the advisory board, I will continue to look forward to reading and learning from one of the profession’s best journals. Best wishes for its continued success. REFERENCES 1. Richard M. Dougherty & William H. Webb, “Uncertain Times,” Journal of Academic Librarianship I (March 1975): 3. 2. William H. Webb, “Certain Times,” Journal qf Academic Librarianship 6 (March 1980): 3.
March 1999
81