Peer review in carnegie research libraries

College and Research Libraries

Volumn 59, Issue 6, 1998, Pages 512-522

  Leysen, Joan M ^a   Black, William K ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0032353301     PISSN: 00100870     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.5860/crl.59.6.511     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Denise Magner, "A Scholar Provides an Intellectual Framework for Plans to End or Revamp Tenure Systems," Chronicle of Higher Education 43 (Feb. 1997): A10-A11. See AAHE Forum on Faculty Roles and Rewards (http://www.aahe.org/).
2. ACRL Institutional Priorities and Faculty Rewards Task Force, "The Redefining Scholarship Project: A Draft Report," College & Research Libraries News 58 (June 1997): 414-18. This report is based on Buyer's four functions of scholarship: discovery, integration, application, and teaching. Ernest L. Boyer, Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate (Princeton, N.J.: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, 1990), 15-25.
3. ACRL Institutional Priorities and Faculty Rewards Task Force, "The Redefining Scholarship Project: A Draft Report," College & Research Libraries News 58 (June 1997): 414-18. This report is based on Buyer's four functions of scholarship: discovery, integration, application, and teaching. Ernest L. Boyer, Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate (Princeton, N.J.: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, 1990), 15-25.
4. Robert M. Diamond, Serving on Promotion and Tenure Committees: A Faculty Guide (Bolton, Mass.: Anker, 1994), 5-7; cited in Charles E. Glassick, Mary Taylor Huber, and Gene I. Maeroff, Scholarship Assessed: Evaluation of the Professoriate (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1997), 54.
5. Robert M. Diamond, Serving on Promotion and Tenure Committees: A Faculty Guide (Bolton, Mass.: Anker, 1994), 5-7; cited in Charles E. Glassick, Mary Taylor Huber, and Gene I. Maeroff, Scholarship Assessed: Evaluation of the Professoriate (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1997), 54.
6. This article uses advancement and continuing appointment in a general sense to include promotion and tenure.
7. Developed in 1970 by Clark Kerr, the Carnegie system of classification groups together U.S. colleges and universities with similar missions and programs. Research I institutions receive a minimum of $40 million in federal funding annually whereas Research II institutions receive a minimum of $15.5 million in federal support. A Classification of Institutions of Higher Education (Princeton, N.J.: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, 1994), vii, xix, 3-8.
8. Studies that have surveyed Carnegie Research libraries include: Betsy Park and Robert Riggs, "Status of the Profession: A 1989 National Survey of Tenure and Promotion Policies for Academic Librarians," College & Research Libraries 52 (May 1991): 275-89; Betsy Park and Robert Riggs, "Tenure and Promotion: A Study of Practices by Institutional Type," Journal of Academic Librarianship 19 (May 1993): 72-77; Charles B. Lowry, "The Status of Faculty Status for Academic Librarians: A Twenty-Year Perspective," College & Research Libraries 54 (Mar. 1993): 163-72; Pamela S. Bradigan and Carol A. Mularski, "Evaluation of Academic Librarians' Publications for Tenure and Initial Promotion," Journal of Academic Librarianship 22 (Sept. 1996): 360-65. Some earlier studies of ARL institutions include: Thomas G. English, "Librarian Status in Eighty-Nine U.S. Academic Institutions of the Association of Research Libraries: 1982," College &Research Libraries 44 (May 1983): 199-211; Ronald Rayman and Frank W. Goudy, "Research and Publication Requirements in University Libraries," College & Research Libraries 41 (Jan. 1980): 43-48; Priscilla Geahigan, et al, "Acceptability of Non-library Information Science Publications in the Promotion and Tenure of Academic Librarians," College & Research Libraries 42 (Nov. 1981): 571-75; John Cosgriff, Donald Kenney, and Gail McMillan, "Support for Publishing at Academic Libraries: How Much Exists?" Journal of Academic Librarianship 16 (May 1990): 94-97.
9. Studies that have surveyed Carnegie Research libraries include: Betsy Park and Robert Riggs, "Status of the Profession: A 1989 National Survey of Tenure and Promotion Policies for Academic Librarians," College & Research Libraries 52 (May 1991): 275-89; Betsy Park and Robert Riggs, "Tenure and Promotion: A Study of Practices by Institutional Type," Journal of Academic Librarianship 19 (May 1993): 72-77; Charles B. Lowry, "The Status of Faculty Status for Academic Librarians: A Twenty-Year Perspective," College & Research Libraries 54 (Mar. 1993): 163-72; Pamela S. Bradigan and Carol A. Mularski, "Evaluation of Academic Librarians' Publications for Tenure and Initial Promotion," Journal of Academic Librarianship 22 (Sept. 1996): 360-65. Some earlier studies of ARL institutions include: Thomas G. English, "Librarian Status in Eighty-Nine U.S. Academic Institutions of the Association of Research Libraries: 1982," College &Research Libraries 44 (May 1983): 199-211; Ronald Rayman and Frank W. Goudy, "Research and Publication Requirements in University Libraries," College & Research Libraries 41 (Jan. 1980): 43-48; Priscilla Geahigan, et al, "Acceptability of Non-library Information Science Publications in the Promotion and Tenure of Academic Librarians," College & Research Libraries 42 (Nov. 1981): 571-75; John Cosgriff, Donald Kenney, and Gail McMillan, "Support for Publishing at Academic Libraries: How Much Exists?" Journal of Academic Librarianship 16 (May 1990): 94-97.
10. Studies that have surveyed Carnegie Research libraries include: Betsy Park and Robert Riggs, "Status of the Profession: A 1989 National Survey of Tenure and Promotion Policies for Academic Librarians," College & Research Libraries 52 (May 1991): 275-89; Betsy Park and Robert Riggs, "Tenure and Promotion: A Study of Practices by Institutional Type," Journal of Academic Librarianship 19 (May 1993): 72-77; Charles B. Lowry, "The Status of Faculty Status for Academic Librarians: A Twenty-Year Perspective," College & Research Libraries 54 (Mar. 1993): 163-72; Pamela S. Bradigan and Carol A. Mularski, "Evaluation of Academic Librarians' Publications for Tenure and Initial Promotion," Journal of Academic Librarianship 22 (Sept. 1996): 360-65. Some earlier studies of ARL institutions include: Thomas G. English, "Librarian Status in Eighty-Nine U.S. Academic Institutions of the Association of Research Libraries: 1982," College &Research Libraries 44 (May 1983): 199-211; Ronald Rayman and Frank W. Goudy, "Research and Publication Requirements in University Libraries," College & Research Libraries 41 (Jan. 1980): 43-48; Priscilla Geahigan, et al, "Acceptability of Non-library Information Science Publications in the Promotion and Tenure of Academic Librarians," College & Research Libraries 42 (Nov. 1981): 571-75; John Cosgriff, Donald Kenney, and Gail McMillan, "Support for Publishing at Academic Libraries: How Much Exists?" Journal of Academic Librarianship 16 (May 1990): 94-97.
11. Studies that have surveyed Carnegie Research libraries include: Betsy Park and Robert Riggs, "Status of the Profession: A 1989 National Survey of Tenure and Promotion Policies for Academic Librarians," College & Research Libraries 52 (May 1991): 275-89; Betsy Park and Robert Riggs, "Tenure and Promotion: A Study of Practices by Institutional Type," Journal of Academic Librarianship 19 (May 1993): 72-77; Charles B. Lowry, "The Status of Faculty Status for Academic Librarians: A Twenty-Year Perspective," College & Research Libraries 54 (Mar. 1993): 163-72; Pamela S. Bradigan and Carol A. Mularski, "Evaluation of Academic Librarians' Publications for Tenure and Initial Promotion," Journal of Academic Librarianship 22 (Sept. 1996): 360-65. Some earlier studies of ARL institutions include: Thomas G. English, "Librarian Status in Eighty-Nine U.S. Academic Institutions of the Association of Research Libraries: 1982," College &Research Libraries 44 (May 1983): 199-211; Ronald Rayman and Frank W. Goudy, "Research and Publication Requirements in University Libraries," College & Research Libraries 41 (Jan. 1980): 43-48; Priscilla Geahigan, et al, "Acceptability of Non-library Information Science Publications in the Promotion and Tenure of Academic Librarians," College & Research Libraries 42 (Nov. 1981): 571-75; John Cosgriff, Donald Kenney, and Gail McMillan, "Support for Publishing at Academic Libraries: How Much Exists?" Journal of Academic Librarianship 16 (May 1990): 94-97.
12. Studies that have surveyed Carnegie Research libraries include: Betsy Park and Robert Riggs, "Status of the Profession: A 1989 National Survey of Tenure and Promotion Policies for Academic Librarians," College & Research Libraries 52 (May 1991): 275-89; Betsy Park and Robert Riggs, "Tenure and Promotion: A Study of Practices by Institutional Type," Journal of Academic Librarianship 19 (May 1993): 72-77; Charles B. Lowry, "The Status of Faculty Status for Academic Librarians: A Twenty-Year Perspective," College & Research Libraries 54 (Mar. 1993): 163-72; Pamela S. Bradigan and Carol A. Mularski, "Evaluation of Academic Librarians' Publications for Tenure and Initial Promotion," Journal of Academic Librarianship 22 (Sept. 1996): 360-65. Some earlier studies of ARL institutions include: Thomas G. English, "Librarian Status in Eighty-Nine U.S. Academic Institutions of the Association of Research Libraries: 1982," College &Research Libraries 44 (May 1983): 199-211; Ronald Rayman and Frank W. Goudy, "Research and Publication Requirements in University Libraries," College & Research Libraries 41 (Jan. 1980): 43-48; Priscilla Geahigan, et al, "Acceptability of Non-library Information Science Publications in the Promotion and Tenure of Academic Librarians," College & Research Libraries 42 (Nov. 1981): 571-75; John Cosgriff, Donald Kenney, and Gail McMillan, "Support for Publishing at Academic Libraries: How Much Exists?" Journal of Academic Librarianship 16 (May 1990): 94-97.
13. Studies that have surveyed Carnegie Research libraries include: Betsy Park and Robert Riggs, "Status of the Profession: A 1989 National Survey of Tenure and Promotion Policies for Academic Librarians," College & Research Libraries 52 (May 1991): 275-89; Betsy Park and Robert Riggs, "Tenure and Promotion: A Study of Practices by Institutional Type," Journal of Academic Librarianship 19 (May 1993): 72-77; Charles B. Lowry, "The Status of Faculty Status for Academic Librarians: A Twenty-Year Perspective," College & Research Libraries 54 (Mar. 1993): 163-72; Pamela S. Bradigan and Carol A. Mularski, "Evaluation of Academic Librarians' Publications for Tenure and Initial Promotion," Journal of Academic Librarianship 22 (Sept. 1996): 360-65. Some earlier studies of ARL institutions include: Thomas G. English, "Librarian Status in Eighty-Nine U.S. Academic Institutions of the Association of Research Libraries: 1982," College &Research Libraries 44 (May 1983): 199-211; Ronald Rayman and Frank W. Goudy, "Research and Publication Requirements in University Libraries," College & Research Libraries 41 (Jan. 1980): 43-48; Priscilla Geahigan, et al, "Acceptability of Non-library Information Science Publications in the Promotion and Tenure of Academic Librarians," College & Research Libraries 42 (Nov. 1981): 571-75; John Cosgriff, Donald Kenney, and Gail McMillan, "Support for Publishing at Academic Libraries: How Much Exists?" Journal of Academic Librarianship 16 (May 1990): 94-97.
14. Studies that have surveyed Carnegie Research libraries include: Betsy Park and Robert Riggs, "Status of the Profession: A 1989 National Survey of Tenure and Promotion Policies for Academic Librarians," College & Research Libraries 52 (May 1991): 275-89; Betsy Park and Robert Riggs, "Tenure and Promotion: A Study of Practices by Institutional Type," Journal of Academic Librarianship 19 (May 1993): 72-77; Charles B. Lowry, "The Status of Faculty Status for Academic Librarians: A Twenty-Year Perspective," College & Research Libraries 54 (Mar. 1993): 163-72; Pamela S. Bradigan and Carol A. Mularski, "Evaluation of Academic Librarians' Publications for Tenure and Initial Promotion," Journal of Academic Librarianship 22 (Sept. 1996): 360-65. Some earlier studies of ARL institutions include: Thomas G. English, "Librarian Status in Eighty-Nine U.S. Academic Institutions of the Association of Research Libraries: 1982," College &Research Libraries 44 (May 1983): 199-211; Ronald Rayman and Frank W. Goudy, "Research and Publication Requirements in University Libraries," College & Research Libraries 41 (Jan. 1980): 43-48; Priscilla Geahigan, et al, "Acceptability of Non-library Information Science Publications in the Promotion and Tenure of Academic Librarians," College & Research Libraries 42 (Nov. 1981): 571-75; John Cosgriff, Donald Kenney, and Gail McMillan, "Support for Publishing at Academic Libraries: How Much Exists?" Journal of Academic Librarianship 16 (May 1990): 94-97.
15. Studies that have surveyed Carnegie Research libraries include: Betsy Park and Robert Riggs, "Status of the Profession: A 1989 National Survey of Tenure and Promotion Policies for Academic Librarians," College & Research Libraries 52 (May 1991): 275-89; Betsy Park and Robert Riggs, "Tenure and Promotion: A Study of Practices by Institutional Type," Journal of Academic Librarianship 19 (May 1993): 72-77; Charles B. Lowry, "The Status of Faculty Status for Academic Librarians: A Twenty-Year Perspective," College & Research Libraries 54 (Mar. 1993): 163-72; Pamela S. Bradigan and Carol A. Mularski, "Evaluation of Academic Librarians' Publications for Tenure and Initial Promotion," Journal of Academic Librarianship 22 (Sept. 1996): 360-65. Some earlier studies of ARL institutions include: Thomas G. English, "Librarian Status in Eighty-Nine U.S. Academic Institutions of the Association of Research Libraries: 1982," College &Research Libraries 44 (May 1983): 199-211; Ronald Rayman and Frank W. Goudy, "Research and Publication Requirements in University Libraries," College & Research Libraries 41 (Jan. 1980): 43-48; Priscilla Geahigan, et al, "Acceptability of Non-library Information Science Publications in the Promotion and Tenure of Academic Librarians," College & Research Libraries 42 (Nov. 1981): 571-75; John Cosgriff, Donald Kenney, and Gail McMillan, "Support for Publishing at Academic Libraries: How Much Exists?" Journal of Academic Librarianship 16 (May 1990): 94-97.
16. Judy Horn, "Peer Review for Librarians and Its Application in ARL Libraries," in Academic Libraries: Myths and Realities, ed. Suzanne C. Dodson and Gary L. Menges (Chicago: ACRL, 1984), 135-10.
17. Ibid., 138; Karen F. Smith, et al, "Tenured Librarians in Large University Libraries," College & Research Libraries 45 (Mar. 1984): 91-98.
18. Ibid., 138; Karen F. Smith, et al, "Tenured Librarians in Large University Libraries," College & Research Libraries 45 (Mar. 1984): 91-98.
19. ACRL, "Standards for Faculty Status for College and University Librarians," College & Research Libraries News 8 (Sept. 1972): 210-12.
20. Park and Riggs, "Status of the Profession," 281.
21. Park and Riggs, "Tenure and Promotion," 75.
22. For example, see: Park and Riggs, "Status of the Profession," 282; Rayman and Goudy, "Research and Publication Requirements in University Libraries," 46-47; Geahigan et al, "Acceptability of Non-library Information Science Publications," 573-75; W. Bede Mitchell and L. Stanislava Swieszkowski, "Publication Requirements and Tenure Approval Rates: An Issue for Academic Librarians," College & Research Libraries 46 (May 1985): 249-55; Cosgriff, Kenney, and McMillan, "Support for Publishing at Academic Libraries," 96.
23. For example, see: Park and Riggs, "Status of the Profession," 282; Rayman and Goudy, "Research and Publication Requirements in University Libraries," 46-47; Geahigan et al, "Acceptability of Non-library Information Science Publications," 573-75; W. Bede Mitchell and L. Stanislava Swieszkowski, "Publication Requirements and Tenure Approval Rates: An Issue for Academic Librarians," College & Research Libraries 46 (May 1985): 249-55; Cosgriff, Kenney, and McMillan, "Support for Publishing at Academic Libraries," 96.
24. For example, see: Park and Riggs, "Status of the Profession," 282; Rayman and Goudy, "Research and Publication Requirements in University Libraries," 46-47; Geahigan et al, "Acceptability of Non-library Information Science Publications," 573-75; W. Bede Mitchell and L. Stanislava Swieszkowski, "Publication Requirements and Tenure Approval Rates: An Issue for Academic Librarians," College & Research Libraries 46 (May 1985): 249-55; Cosgriff, Kenney, and McMillan, "Support for Publishing at Academic Libraries," 96.
25. For example, see: Park and Riggs, "Status of the Profession," 282; Rayman and Goudy, "Research and Publication Requirements in University Libraries," 46-47; Geahigan et al, "Acceptability of Non-library Information Science Publications," 573-75; W. Bede Mitchell and L. Stanislava Swieszkowski, "Publication Requirements and Tenure Approval Rates: An Issue for Academic Librarians," College & Research Libraries 46 (May 1985): 249-55; Cosgriff, Kenney, and McMillan, "Support for Publishing at Academic Libraries," 96.
26. For example, see: Park and Riggs, "Status of the Profession," 282; Rayman and Goudy, "Research and Publication Requirements in University Libraries," 46-47; Geahigan et al, "Acceptability of Non-library Information Science Publications," 573-75; W. Bede Mitchell and L. Stanislava Swieszkowski, "Publication Requirements and Tenure Approval Rates: An Issue for Academic Librarians," College & Research Libraries 46 (May 1985): 249-55; Cosgriff, Kenney, and McMillan, "Support for Publishing at Academic Libraries," 96.
27. Bradigan and Mularski, "Evaluation of Academic Librarians' Publications for Tenure and Initial Promotion," 361-63; William K. Black and Joan M. Leysen, "Scholarship and the Academic Librarian," College & Research Libraries 55 (May 1994): 229-41.
28. Bradigan and Mularski, "Evaluation of Academic Librarians' Publications for Tenure and Initial Promotion," 361-63; William K. Black and Joan M. Leysen, "Scholarship and the Academic Librarian," College & Research Libraries 55 (May 1994): 229-41.
29. These standards define librarians with faculty status as individuals who exercise independent judgment, undergo a regular and rigorous peer review of their performance, participate in an academic form of governance, are eligible for membership in the faculty senate or equivalent government body, receive equitable compensation and benefits, are covered by a tenure policy equivalent to those of other faculty, are promoted in rank on the basis of academic proficiency and professional effectiveness, and are eligible for research leaves, research funding, and protection of academic freedom. See ACRL Academic Status Committee, "Standards for Faculty Status for College and University Librarians," College & Research Libraries News 53 (May 1992): 317-18.
30. This figure is difficult to compare to earlier studies due to the different type of institutions surveyed and the size of the survey population. Lowry reported that 53 percent of Carnegie research and doctoral institutions combined had faculty status. Park and Riggs' 20 percent is based on 35 responses, a sample of 34 percent of all Carnegie research institutions. See Lowry, "The Status of Faculty Status for Academic Librarians," 165; Park and Riggs, "Tenure and Promotion," 73. ARL figures ranged from 35 percent reported by Rayman and Goudy, 46.1 percent by English, 46 percent by Lowry, and 30 percent by ACRL. See Rayman and Goudy, "Research and Publication Requirements," 44; English, "Librarian Status in Eighty-Nine U.S. Academic Institutions," 200-201; Lowry, "The Status of Faculty Status for Academic Librarians," 165; "Academic Status Survey," College &Research Libraries News 42 (June 1981): 171.
31. This figure is difficult to compare to earlier studies due to the different type of institutions surveyed and the size of the survey population. Lowry reported that 53 percent of Carnegie research and doctoral institutions combined had faculty status. Park and Riggs' 20 percent is based on 35 responses, a sample of 34 percent of all Carnegie research institutions. See Lowry, "The Status of Faculty Status for Academic Librarians," 165; Park and Riggs, "Tenure and Promotion," 73. ARL figures ranged from 35 percent reported by Rayman and Goudy, 46.1 percent by English, 46 percent by Lowry, and 30 percent by ACRL. See Rayman and Goudy, "Research and Publication Requirements," 44; English, "Librarian Status in Eighty-Nine U.S. Academic Institutions," 200-201; Lowry, "The Status of Faculty Status for Academic Librarians," 165; "Academic Status Survey," College &Research Libraries News 42 (June 1981): 171.
32. This figure is difficult to compare to earlier studies due to the different type of institutions surveyed and the size of the survey population. Lowry reported that 53 percent of Carnegie research and doctoral institutions combined had faculty status. Park and Riggs' 20 percent is based on 35 responses, a sample of 34 percent of all Carnegie research institutions. See Lowry, "The Status of Faculty Status for Academic Librarians," 165; Park and Riggs, "Tenure and Promotion," 73. ARL figures ranged from 35 percent reported by Rayman and Goudy, 46.1 percent by English, 46 percent by Lowry, and 30 percent by ACRL. See Rayman and Goudy, "Research and Publication Requirements," 44; English, "Librarian Status in Eighty-Nine U.S. Academic Institutions," 200-201; Lowry, "The Status of Faculty Status for Academic Librarians," 165; "Academic Status Survey," College &Research Libraries News 42 (June 1981): 171.
33. This figure is difficult to compare to earlier studies due to the different type of institutions surveyed and the size of the survey population. Lowry reported that 53 percent of Carnegie research and doctoral institutions combined had faculty status. Park and Riggs' 20 percent is based on 35 responses, a sample of 34 percent of all Carnegie research institutions. See Lowry, "The Status of Faculty Status for Academic Librarians," 165; Park and Riggs, "Tenure and Promotion," 73. ARL figures ranged from 35 percent reported by Rayman and Goudy, 46.1 percent by English, 46 percent by Lowry, and 30 percent by ACRL. See Rayman and Goudy, "Research and Publication Requirements," 44; English, "Librarian Status in Eighty-Nine U.S. Academic Institutions," 200-201; Lowry, "The Status of Faculty Status for Academic Librarians," 165; "Academic Status Survey," College &Research Libraries News 42 (June 1981): 171.
34. This figure is difficult to compare to earlier studies due to the different type of institutions surveyed and the size of the survey population. Lowry reported that 53 percent of Carnegie research and doctoral institutions combined had faculty status. Park and Riggs' 20 percent is based on 35 responses, a sample of 34 percent of all Carnegie research institutions. See Lowry, "The Status of Faculty Status for Academic Librarians," 165; Park and Riggs, "Tenure and Promotion," 73. ARL figures ranged from 35 percent reported by Rayman and Goudy, 46.1 percent by English, 46 percent by Lowry, and 30 percent by ACRL. See Rayman and Goudy, "Research and Publication Requirements," 44; English, "Librarian Status in Eighty-Nine U.S. Academic Institutions," 200-201; Lowry, "The Status of Faculty Status for Academic Librarians," 165; "Academic Status Survey," College &Research Libraries News 42 (June 1981): 171.
35. This figure is difficult to compare to earlier studies due to the different type of institutions surveyed and the size of the survey population. Lowry reported that 53 percent of Carnegie research and doctoral institutions combined had faculty status. Park and Riggs' 20 percent is based on 35 responses, a sample of 34 percent of all Carnegie research institutions. See Lowry, "The Status of Faculty Status for Academic Librarians," 165; Park and Riggs, "Tenure and Promotion," 73. ARL figures ranged from 35 percent reported by Rayman and Goudy, 46.1 percent by English, 46 percent by Lowry, and 30 percent by ACRL. See Rayman and Goudy, "Research and Publication Requirements," 44; English, "Librarian Status in Eighty-Nine U.S. Academic Institutions," 200-201; Lowry, "The Status of Faculty Status for Academic Librarians," 165; "Academic Status Survey," College &Research Libraries News 42 (June 1981): 171.
36. Faculty rank includes instructor, assistant professor, associate professor, and professor. Examples of equivalent rank include assistant librarian, associate librarian, and librarian. Numerical rank includes titles such as librarian I, II, III, and IV. These categories were also used by English in "Librarian Status in Eighty-Nine U.S. Academic Institutions," 203, 208.
37. Ibid., 207. In 1982, English's survey of ARL institutions indicated that faculty rank represented 23.6 percent of the ranks provided in the survey group. This is now 35 percent in the current survey. The number-holding equivalent rank was similar for both surveys.
38. Smith et al, "Tenured Librarians in Large University Libraries," 95.
39. This trend was also noted at the Auraria Library (University of Colorado at Denver) from 1976 to 1988. Kathleen Kenny, Linda D. Tietjen, and Rutherford W. Witthus, "Increasing Scholarly Productivity among Library Faculty: Strategies for a Medium-sized Library," Journal of Academic Librarianship 16 (Nov. 1990): 276-79.
40. Rayman and Goudy, "Research and Publication Requirements," 44.
41. Biaise Cronin and Kara Overfelt, "Brief Communication: E-journals and Tenure," Journal of the American Society for Information Science 46 (Oct. 1995): 700-703.
42. Lisa Guernsey, "Scholars Who Work with Technology Fear They Suffer in Tenure Reviews," Chronicle of Higher Education 43 (June 1997): A21-A22.
43. W. Michael Havener and Wilbur A. Stolt, "The Professional Development Activities of Academic Librarians: Does Institutional Support Make a Difference?" College & Research Libraries 55 (Jan. 1994): 25-40.
44. Cosgriff, Kenney, and McMillan, "Support for Publishing at Academic Libraries," 96; English, "Librarian Status in Eighty-Nine U.S. Academic Institutions," 207; Lowry, "The Status of Faculty Status for Academic Librarians," 167.
45. Cosgriff, Kenney, and McMillan, "Support for Publishing at Academic Libraries," 96; English, "Librarian Status in Eighty-Nine U.S. Academic Institutions," 207; Lowry, "The Status of Faculty Status for Academic Librarians," 167.
46. Cosgriff, Kenney, and McMillan, "Support for Publishing at Academic Libraries," 96; English, "Librarian Status in Eighty-Nine U.S. Academic Institutions," 207; Lowry, "The Status of Faculty Status for Academic Librarians," 167.
47. W. Bede Mitchell and Bruce Morton, "On Becoming Faculty Librarians: Acculturation Problems and Remedies," College & Research Libraries 53 (Sept. 1992): 379-92.
48. Rayman and Goudy, "Research and Publication Requirements," 46.
49. Roma M. Harris, "The Mentoring Trap," Library Journal 118 (Oct. 1993): 37-39.
50. Jeannie P. Miller and Candace R. Benefiel, "Academic Librarians and the Pursuit of Tenure: The Support Group As a Strategy for Success," College & Research Libraries 59 (May 1998): 260-65.
51. Jeffrey R. Young, "Wave of the Future or a Waste? UCLA Requires Web Page for Every Class," Chronicle of Higher Education 43 (Aug. 1997): A21-A22.
52. AAHE Forum on Faculty Roles and Rewards (http://www.aahe.org/).
53. ACRL Institutional Priorities and Faculty Rewards Task Force, "The Redefining Scholarship Project," 414-18.