Do Librarians Deserve Tenure? Casting an Anthropological Eye upon Role Definition within the Law School

Law Library Journal

Volumn 88, Issue 3, 1996, Pages 382-398

  Donovan, James M ^a  

^a TULANE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0345941831     PISSN: 00239283     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. Christina Elnora Garza, Studying the Natives on the Shop Floor, BUS. WK., Sept. 30, 1991, at 74.
2. Roy G. D'Andrade, Cultural Meaning Systems, in CULTURE THEORY: ESSAYS ON MIND, SELF AND EMOTION 88, 108 (Richard A. Shweder & Robert A. LeVine eds., 1984).
3. James M. Donovan, God Is As God Does: Law, Anthropology, and the Definition of "Religion," 6 SETON HALL CONST. L.J. 23 (1995).
4. Despite this disappointment, the article has been accepted for publication in an alternative outlet: James M. Donovan, Restoring Free Exercise Protections by Limiting Them: Preventing a Repeat of Smith, 17 N. ILL. U. L. REV. (forthcoming 1997).
5. Julie J. McGowan & Elizabeth H. Dow, Faculty Status and Academic Librarians hip: Transformation to a Clinical Model, 21 J. ACAD. LIBRARIANSHIP 345, 347 (1995).
6. TULANE UNIVERSITY, LIBRARY DEPARTMENT HANDBOOK 1 (1990). The Director of the law library, however, is tenured, and is regarded as a member of the teaching faculty. References in this piece to librarians are to all other library professionals, excepting only this one.
7. MARY DOUGLAS, PURITY AND DANGER: AN ANALYSIS OF THE CONCEPTS OF POLLUTION AND TABOO 35 (1984).
8. McGowan & Dow, supra note 5, at 346.
9. In 1990, when I interviewed for a position in the government documents department at the University of Georgia in Athens, I inquired about tenure for librarians. I was told that librarians had enjoyed tenure rank in the past, but had voluntarily surrendered that privilege a few years before.
10. Michael Koenig et al., Faculty Status for Library Professionals: Its Effect on Job Turnover and Job Satisfaction among University Research Library Directors, 57 C. RES. LIBR. 295 (1996). The ACRL Standards for Faculty Status for College and Research Librarians (passed July 3, 1991) 〈http://www.ala.org/acrl.html〉, enumerates nine privileges which should accrue to the librarian as result of faculty status: (1) Professional responsibilities; (2) Library governance; (3) College and university governance; (4) Compensation; (5) Tenure; (6) Promotion; (7) Leaves; (8) Research and development funds; and (9) Academic freedom. "Hollow" status is characterized by Koenig and his colleagues as lacking release time and funding for research and writing (numbers 7 and 8 on the ACRL list). Koenig et al., supra note 10, at 299. However, any designed status which does not include all items on the list (excluding tenure, since this is considered separately) should be deemed "hollow" relative to the status awarded teaching faculty.
11. Michael Koenig et al., Faculty Status for Library Professionals: Its Effect on Job Turnover and Job Satisfaction among University Research Library Directors, 57 C. RES. LIBR. 295 (1996). The ACRL Standards for Faculty Status for College and Research Librarians (passed July 3, 1991) 〈http://www.ala.org/acrl.html〉, enumerates nine privileges which should accrue to the librarian as result of faculty status: (1) Professional responsibilities; (2) Library governance; (3) College and university governance; (4) Compensation; (5) Tenure; (6) Promotion; (7) Leaves; (8) Research and development funds; and (9) Academic freedom. "Hollow" status is characterized by Koenig and his colleagues as lacking release time and funding for research and writing (numbers 7 and 8 on the ACRL list). Koenig et al., supra note 10, at 299. However, any designed status which does not include all items on the list (excluding tenure, since this is considered separately) should be deemed "hollow" relative to the status awarded teaching faculty.
12. One response to this handicap has been efforts to repackage the J.D. as being equivalent to the Ph.D. for at least some purposes. Long ago Tulane Law School did issue a memo to this effect, although little seems to have come of the policy as I have not found anyone else who remembers it. This argument is unlikely to persuade anyone other than lawyers, since the J.D. is not a research degree and hence is inherently inferior to the Ph.D. On the other hand, in the context of their jobs law teachers are required to conduct legal research for publication. So while the degrees themselves are unequal, the actual responsibilities of teaching Ph.D.s and J.D.s are more alike than not. Does this post-degree similarity negate the differences engendered by the degrees themselves? Would the quality of legal scholarship be improved if training for such research was a necessary dimension of the degree program, instead, as is now the case, leaving it for individuals to pick up on their own? Such questions concerning the relationship of the J.D. to the Ph.D., I am told, occupied the internet discussion group, LAWPROF, for quite some time. Efforts to locate an archived copy of this exchange have not been successful.
13. McGowan & Dow, supra note 5, at 347.
14. Perhaps it could be argued that despite the similarity of the J.D. and the M.L.S. as being master's degrees, the J.D. is still a qualitatively superior degree in terms of what is actually demanded for its achievement, and hence law professors are justified in seeking to distance themselves away from and above librarians. But I have found that this "distancing" occurs even when the librarian also holds a J.D. That fact clearly indicates that it is indeed the social variables which are determinative, rather than any genuine educational ones. Librarians are being slighted because they are librarians, not because they hold inferior degrees.
15. Kenneth L. Karst, Religious Freedom and Equal Citizenship: Reflections on Lukumi, 69 TULANE L. REV. 335, 355 (1994).
16. ACRL, Model Statement of Criteria and Procedures for Appointment, Promotion in Academic Rank, and Tenure for College and University Librarians IIIC (revised January 20, 1987) 〈http://www.ala.org/acrl.html〉.
17. McGowan and Dow observe that librarians often fare poorly when judged by the same criteria applied to teaching faculty. Using the medical school model, they propose that librarians be evaluated as are clinicians rather than traditional teachers. This possibility might initially appeal to law schools, who also have a clinical population and therefore are already familiar with distinguishing between a clinician versus a lecturer. However, even these authors concede that the clinical tenure track offers its pursuers less academic status than their teaching counterparts, so this approach would not resolve the problem of informal disparagement of the librarian. McGowan & Dow, supra note 5, at 349.
18. See Janet Swan Hill, Wearing Our Own Clothes: Librarians as Faculty, 20 J. ACAD. LIBRARIAN-SHIP 71 (1994). Many references to the literature on librarians and academic tenure can also be found in William K. Black and Joan M. Leysen, Scholarship and the Academic Librarian, 55 C. RES. LIBR. 229 n.1 (1994). Also of specific interest to law librarians is the series of surveys conducted by James F. Bailey and his various associates, the latest of which appeared in 1984: Oscar M. Trelles & James F. Bailey, Autonomy, Librarian Status, and Librarian Tenure in Law School Libraries: The State of the Art, 1984, 78 L. LIBR. J. 605 (1986). More recently, designers of AALL's 1993 SALARY SURVEY felt that it would be useful to sort librarians by tenure status. Overall, librarians arguing against tenure are rare. One instance, however is Jerry D. Campbell, An Administrator's View of the Negative Impact of Tenure on Libraries, 6 TECHNICAL SERVICES Q. 3 (1988).
19. See Janet Swan Hill, Wearing Our Own Clothes: Librarians as Faculty, 20 J. ACAD. LIBRARIAN-SHIP 71 (1994). Many references to the literature on librarians and academic tenure can also be found in William K. Black and Joan M. Leysen, Scholarship and the Academic Librarian, 55 C. RES. LIBR. 229 n.1 (1994). Also of specific interest to law librarians is the series of surveys conducted by James F. Bailey and his various associates, the latest of which appeared in 1984: Oscar M. Trelles & James F. Bailey, Autonomy, Librarian Status, and Librarian Tenure in Law School Libraries: The State of the Art, 1984, 78 L. LIBR. J. 605 (1986). More recently, designers of AALL's 1993 SALARY SURVEY felt that it would be useful to sort librarians by tenure status. Overall, librarians arguing against tenure are rare. One instance, however is Jerry D. Campbell, An Administrator's View of the Negative Impact of Tenure on Libraries, 6 TECHNICAL SERVICES Q. 3 (1988).
20. See Janet Swan Hill, Wearing Our Own Clothes: Librarians as Faculty, 20 J. ACAD. LIBRARIAN-SHIP 71 (1994). Many references to the literature on librarians and academic tenure can also be found in William K. Black and Joan M. Leysen, Scholarship and the Academic Librarian, 55 C. RES. LIBR. 229 n.1 (1994). Also of specific interest to law librarians is the series of surveys conducted by James F. Bailey and his various associates, the latest of which appeared in 1984: Oscar M. Trelles & James F. Bailey, Autonomy, Librarian Status, and Librarian Tenure in Law School Libraries: The State of the Art, 1984, 78 L. LIBR. J. 605 (1986). More recently, designers of AALL's 1993 SALARY SURVEY felt that it would be useful to sort librarians by tenure status. Overall, librarians arguing against tenure are rare. One instance, however is Jerry D. Campbell, An Administrator's View of the Negative Impact of Tenure on Libraries, 6 TECHNICAL SERVICES Q. 3 (1988).
21. See Janet Swan Hill, Wearing Our Own Clothes: Librarians as Faculty, 20 J. ACAD. LIBRARIAN-SHIP 71 (1994). Many references to the literature on librarians and academic tenure can also be found in William K. Black and Joan M. Leysen, Scholarship and the Academic Librarian, 55 C. RES. LIBR. 229 n.1 (1994). Also of specific interest to law librarians is the series of surveys conducted by James F. Bailey and his various associates, the latest of which appeared in 1984: Oscar M. Trelles & James F. Bailey, Autonomy, Librarian Status, and Librarian Tenure in Law School Libraries: The State of the Art, 1984, 78 L. LIBR. J. 605 (1986). More recently, designers of AALL's 1993 SALARY SURVEY felt that it would be useful to sort librarians by tenure status. Overall, librarians arguing against tenure are rare. One instance, however is Jerry D. Campbell, An Administrator's View of the Negative Impact of Tenure on Libraries, 6 TECHNICAL SERVICES Q. 3 (1988).
22. See, e.g., David Helfand, I Turned Down Tenure, WASH. MONTHLY, June 1986, at 13; Denise K. Magner, Tenure Re-Examined, CHRON. HIGHER EDUC., March 31, 1995, at A17; James O'Toole, Tenure: A Conscientious Objector, 26 CHANGE, May-June 1994, at 79 (May/June 1994); Steven J. Uhlfelder, Tenure Is No Longer Necessary, ORLANDO SENTINEL, June 1,1994, at A13; Dennis A. Williams & Pamela Abramson, Getting Off the Tenure Track, NEWSWEEK, Jan. 31, 1983, at 50.
23. See, e.g., David Helfand, I Turned Down Tenure, WASH. MONTHLY, June 1986, at 13; Denise K. Magner, Tenure Re-Examined, CHRON. HIGHER EDUC., March 31, 1995, at A17; James O'Toole, Tenure: A Conscientious Objector, 26 CHANGE, May-June 1994, at 79 (May/June 1994); Steven J. Uhlfelder, Tenure Is No Longer Necessary, ORLANDO SENTINEL, June 1,1994, at A13; Dennis A. Williams & Pamela Abramson, Getting Off the Tenure Track, NEWSWEEK, Jan. 31, 1983, at 50.
24. See, e.g., David Helfand, I Turned Down Tenure, WASH. MONTHLY, June 1986, at 13; Denise K. Magner, Tenure Re-Examined, CHRON. HIGHER EDUC., March 31, 1995, at A17; James O'Toole, Tenure: A Conscientious Objector, 26 CHANGE, May-June 1994, at 79 (May/June 1994); Steven J. Uhlfelder, Tenure Is No Longer Necessary, ORLANDO SENTINEL, June 1,1994, at A13; Dennis A. Williams & Pamela Abramson, Getting Off the Tenure Track, NEWSWEEK, Jan. 31, 1983, at 50.
25. See, e.g., David Helfand, I Turned Down Tenure, WASH. MONTHLY, June 1986, at 13; Denise K. Magner, Tenure Re-Examined, CHRON. HIGHER EDUC., March 31, 1995, at A17; James O'Toole, Tenure: A Conscientious Objector, 26 CHANGE, May-June 1994, at 79 (May/June 1994); Steven J. Uhlfelder, Tenure Is No Longer Necessary, ORLANDO SENTINEL, June 1,1994, at A13; Dennis A. Williams & Pamela Abramson, Getting Off the Tenure Track, NEWSWEEK, Jan. 31, 1983, at 50.
26. See, e.g., David Helfand, I Turned Down Tenure, WASH. MONTHLY, June 1986, at 13; Denise K. Magner, Tenure Re-Examined, CHRON. HIGHER EDUC., March 31, 1995, at A17; James O'Toole, Tenure: A Conscientious Objector, 26 CHANGE, May-June 1994, at 79 (May/June 1994); Steven J. Uhlfelder, Tenure Is No Longer Necessary, ORLANDO SENTINEL, June 1,1994, at A13; Dennis A. Williams & Pamela Abramson, Getting Off the Tenure Track, NEWSWEEK, Jan. 31, 1983, at 50.
27. One exception which proves the rule is federal judgeships. If, as will be argued, tenure is necessary to promote the free exchange of ideas without fear of administrative reprisal, so too must judges, in order to arrive at disinterested decisions, be removed from the vacillations of political retribution. Judges thus enjoy a rare instance of nonacademic tenure protection.
28. Alan Grogono, Tenure the Teacher; Let Research Be Its Own Reward, EDUC. REC., Winter 1994, at 37.
29. Patricia R. Plante, The Attack on Tenure, CHANGE, May-June 1994, at 82; see also James E. Perley, Tenure, Academic Freedom, and Governance, ACADEME, Jan.-Feb. 1995, at 43.
30. Patricia R. Plante, The Attack on Tenure, CHANGE, May-June 1994, at 82; see also James E. Perley, Tenure, Academic Freedom, and Governance, ACADEME, Jan.-Feb. 1995, at 43.
31. Many other conditions may be attached as a requirement to receive tenure (e.g., a "service" component is sometimes added to the research and teaching requirements), but these additional requirements speak more to the special demands of a particular university setting, and not to tenure generally. As the case of federal judges suggests, see supra note 19, the need for academic freedom (or its equivalent) alone is both necessary and sufficient to create the class of tenured individuals. However, having once created such a class, there may be strong motivation to use it as a means to other ends (for instance, encouraging permanent and powerful faculty to also be good and involved corporate citizens), which can lead to contextual elaboration of the basic tenure concept. We are therefore here concentrating our attention on the hierarchically most important element of the tenure category.
32. See supra note 22.
33. The place parallel standard emphasizes the teaching component of tenure requirements. Indeed, every reader has suggested that I over-emphasize its importance in the real world at the expense of other, more highly prized achievements such as publications. On the one hand, it is not necessary to dwell on issues such as publications, since it is easy to establish direct equality between publishing articles for professors and librarians. (Indeed, on this point librarians have the edge. Many library-related journals are peer-reviewed and thus garner more status than law reviews which are student-edited.) Even were this not the case, however, I would probably still choose to focus on teaching. While conceding the point that, in practice, teaching is a minimally valued exercise - good teachers who fail to publish are, in my experience, commonly denied tenure, while poor but frequently published teachers are rarely released - it is yet the centerpiece of the official justification for tenure, and is still, in my opinion, the most important responsibility of an academic. As such, I feel it is appropriate to couch discussion in those terms. More directly, failure to do so would be attacked as a fatal deficit by those who would grasp at any straw to avoid dealing with librarians as equals.
34. The distinction being drawn here is essentially Platonic; see especially any edition of his REPUBLIC.
35. Deborah Selsky, Increasing Educational Attainment Levels Good News for Librarians, LIBR.J., Oct. 1, 1989, at 30.
36. [Advertisement], LIBR.J., May 1, 1994, at 158.
37. These are the books derogatorily referred to nowadays as being by "dead, white, European males." See, e.g., Norman Podhoretz, LIBERALISM AND CULTURE: A TURNING OF THE TIDE, COMMENTARY, Oct. 1996, at 25, 28.
38. Thus the families in Mozert v. Hawkins County Board of Education, 827 F.2d 1058 (6th Cir., 1987) argued that "it is a violation of the religious beliefs and convictions of the plaintiff students to be required to read the books [in the school reading program] and a violation of the religious beliefs of the parents to permit their children to read the books. The plaintiffs sought to hold the defendants liable because 'forcing the student-plaintiffs to read school books which teach or inculcate values in violation of their religious beliefs and convictions is a clear violation of their rights to the free exercise of religion.'" Id. at 1060-61. Note that the objection is not to subject matter being taught, in the sense that some object to evolutionary theory being taught to their offspring. The issue here is about the incidental themes which are used in fiction stories to teach reading skills. The parents "objected to passages that expose their children to other forms of religion and to the feelings, attitudes and values of other students that contradict the plaintiffs' religious views without a statement that the other views are incorrect and that the plaintiffs' views are the correct ones." Id. at 1062. For instance, one imaginative story centered on mental telepathy and trips to Mars. However, "'mere exposure' to ideas presented in public school textbooks was not enough to bring the Free Exercise clause into play, despite the belief of religious fundamentalists that their children would be eternally damned if they read the materials." JESSE H. CHOPER, SECURING RELIGIOUS LIBERTY: PRINCIPLES FOR JUDICIAL INTERPRETATION OF THE RELIGION CLAUSES 88 (1995).
39. Thus the families in Mozert v. Hawkins County Board of Education, 827 F.2d 1058 (6th Cir., 1987) argued that "it is a violation of the religious beliefs and convictions of the plaintiff students to be required to read the books [in the school reading program] and a violation of the religious beliefs of the parents to permit their children to read the books. The plaintiffs sought to hold the defendants liable because 'forcing the student-plaintiffs to read school books which teach or inculcate values in violation of their religious beliefs and convictions is a clear violation of their rights to the free exercise of religion.'" Id. at 1060-61. Note that the objection is not to subject matter being taught, in the sense that some object to evolutionary theory being taught to their offspring. The issue here is about the incidental themes which are used in fiction stories to teach reading skills. The parents "objected to passages that expose their children to other forms of religion and to the feelings, attitudes and values of other students that contradict the plaintiffs' religious views without a statement that the other views are incorrect and that the plaintiffs' views are the correct ones." Id. at 1062. For instance, one imaginative story centered on mental telepathy and trips to Mars. However, "'mere exposure' to ideas presented in public school textbooks was not enough to bring the Free Exercise clause into play, despite the belief of religious fundamentalists that their children would be eternally damned if they read the materials." JESSE H. CHOPER, SECURING RELIGIOUS LIBERTY: PRINCIPLES FOR JUDICIAL INTERPRETATION OF THE RELIGION CLAUSES 88 (1995).
40. Thus the families in Mozert v. Hawkins County Board of Education, 827 F.2d 1058 (6th Cir., 1987) argued that "it is a violation of the religious beliefs and convictions of the plaintiff students to be required to read the books [in the school reading program] and a violation of the religious beliefs of the parents to permit their children to read the books. The plaintiffs sought to hold the defendants liable because 'forcing the student-plaintiffs to read school books which teach or inculcate values in violation of their religious beliefs and convictions is a clear violation of their rights to the free exercise of religion.'" Id. at 1060-61. Note that the objection is not to subject matter being taught, in the sense that some object to evolutionary theory being taught to their offspring. The issue here is about the incidental themes which are used in fiction stories to teach reading skills. The parents "objected to passages that expose their children to other forms of religion and to the feelings, attitudes and values of other students that contradict the plaintiffs' religious views without a statement that the other views are incorrect and that the plaintiffs' views are the correct ones." Id. at 1062. For instance, one imaginative story centered on mental telepathy and trips to Mars. However, "'mere exposure' to ideas presented in public school textbooks was not enough to bring the Free Exercise clause into play, despite the belief of religious fundamentalists that their children would be eternally damned if they read the materials." JESSE H. CHOPER, SECURING RELIGIOUS LIBERTY: PRINCIPLES FOR JUDICIAL INTERPRETATION OF THE RELIGION CLAUSES 88 (1995).
41. See Mary Jo Godwin, Conservative Groups Continue Their Fight to Ban Daddy's Roommate, 23 AMER. LIBR. 917 (1992).
42. See David G. Savage, High Court Voids Most of Cable TV Law Curbing Smut Media, L.A. TIMES, June 29, 1996, at A1; Paul M. Barrett, Cable Ruling May Portend Internet Curbs, WALL ST. J., July 1, 1996, at B1.
43. See David G. Savage, High Court Voids Most of Cable TV Law Curbing Smut Media, L.A. TIMES, June 29, 1996, at A1; Paul M. Barrett, Cable Ruling May Portend Internet Curbs, WALL ST. J., July 1, 1996, at B1.
44. See Joseph A. Kirby, N.Y. Attacks Spur Debate on Movies, Copycat Crime, CHIC. TRIB., Dec. 15, 1995, at 4.
45. See Alan Sayre, Shooting Victim Adds Filmmaker to Liability Lawsuit, BATON ROUGE ADVOC., June 14, 1996, at 3B.
46. See, e.g., Manny Gamallo, Effects of Film Argued, TULSA WORLD, June 13, 1996, at A1; Michael Kelley, Grisham's Liability Idea is a Dangerous Petard, COMM. APPEAL., March 31, 1996, at G2; James Gill, Movie Effects, NEW ORLEANS TIMES-PICAYUNE, July 7, 1996, at B7.
47. See, e.g., Manny Gamallo, Effects of Film Argued, TULSA WORLD, June 13, 1996, at A1; Michael Kelley, Grisham's Liability Idea is a Dangerous Petard, COMM. APPEAL., March 31, 1996, at G2; James Gill, Movie Effects, NEW ORLEANS TIMES-PICAYUNE, July 7, 1996, at B7.
48. See, e.g., Manny Gamallo, Effects of Film Argued, TULSA WORLD, June 13, 1996, at A1; Michael Kelley, Grisham's Liability Idea is a Dangerous Petard, COMM. APPEAL., March 31, 1996, at G2; James Gill, Movie Effects, NEW ORLEANS TIMES-PICAYUNE, July 7, 1996, at B7.
49. Oliver Stone's difficulties speak against the easy dismissal of the possibility of librarian liability found in Paul D. Healey, Chicken Little at the Reference Desk: The Myth of Librarian Liability, 87 L. LIBR. J. 515 (1995). Healey concerns himself only with liability scenarios where the information is factually "wrong" or "inaccurate," overlooking when it is held to be morally "bad," as in Stone's case. A "badness" standard could open librarians up to action under a theory of strict liability, which holds that some activities are "inherently dangerous and can only be controlled by holding those who engage in them strictly liable for damages which result from their actions," id. at 523. By this standard, librarians might be held responsible for the dissemination of corrupting information in much the same way gun dealers might be liable for damage caused by weapons they sell, or bookstore owners who sell obscene materials. In both these situations, it is not simply the creator of the object (the gun or the pornography) who is legally vulnerable, but also the person at the point of actual dissemination. Healey implies that only the creator would be liable, but again, the particulars of the case he references apply when information is false, not when it is bad. Id. at 519. In any event, Healey's analysis is incomplete, and librarians are perhaps not as protected from liability suits as he imagines.
50. Oliver Stone's difficulties speak against the easy dismissal of the possibility of librarian liability found in Paul D. Healey, Chicken Little at the Reference Desk: The Myth of Librarian Liability, 87 L. LIBR. J. 515 (1995). Healey concerns himself only with liability scenarios where the information is factually "wrong" or "inaccurate," overlooking when it is held to be morally "bad," as in Stone's case. A "badness" standard could open librarians up to action under a theory of strict liability, which holds that some activities are "inherently dangerous and can only be controlled by holding those who engage in them strictly liable for damages which result from their actions," id. at 523. By this standard, librarians might be held responsible for the dissemination of corrupting information in much the same way gun dealers might be liable for damage caused by weapons they sell, or bookstore owners who sell obscene materials. In both these situations, it is not simply the creator of the object (the gun or the pornography) who is legally vulnerable, but also the person at the point of actual dissemination. Healey implies that only the creator would be liable, but again, the particulars of the case he references apply when information is false, not when it is bad. Id. at 519. In any event, Healey's analysis is incomplete, and librarians are perhaps not as protected from liability suits as he imagines.
51. Oliver Stone's difficulties speak against the easy dismissal of the possibility of librarian liability found in Paul D. Healey, Chicken Little at the Reference Desk: The Myth of Librarian Liability, 87 L. LIBR. J. 515 (1995). Healey concerns himself only with liability scenarios where the information is factually "wrong" or "inaccurate," overlooking when it is held to be morally "bad," as in Stone's case. A "badness" standard could open librarians up to action under a theory of strict liability, which holds that some activities are "inherently dangerous and can only be controlled by holding those who engage in them strictly liable for damages which result from their actions," id. at 523. By this standard, librarians might be held responsible for the dissemination of corrupting information in much the same way gun dealers might be liable for damage caused by weapons they sell, or bookstore owners who sell obscene materials. In both these situations, it is not simply the creator of the object (the gun or the pornography) who is legally vulnerable, but also the person at the point of actual dissemination. Healey implies that only the creator would be liable, but again, the particulars of the case he references apply when information is false, not when it is bad. Id. at 519. In any event, Healey's analysis is incomplete, and librarians are perhaps not as protected from liability suits as he imagines.
52. Again, an analogy might be helpful, one that compares the treating physician with the drugstore pharmacist. The physician examines the patient and prescribes the proper treatment drugs based upon his or her professional experience. The pharmacist - whose knowledge of drugs is often greater than that of physicians - has the more rote and pro forma duty to fill the prescription as ordered, excepting only those rare instances where experience leads him or her to question the physician's conclusions. In the usual flow of events, however, the pharmacist plays a noncreative role in the patient's health care. The pharmacist restricts his or her participation to the ancillary role of certifying that the doctor's order is valid and filled. See Susan Headden et al., Danger at the Drugstore, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REP., Aug. 26, 1996, at 46. So too, librarians can be either creative or noncreative participants in education. This is not the same as arguing that librarians are important or unimportant, or necessary or unnecessary. Under the Great Books assumption of passive knowledge infection, librarians play the role of pharmacist, dispensing the prescribed texts in a formulated manner, with little and rare intervention and input.
53. See, e.g., Charles A. Bunge, Factors Related to Reference Question Answering Success: The Development of a Data-Gathering Form, 24 RQ 482 (1985); Marjorie E. Murfin & Gary M. Gugelchuk, Development and Testing of a Reference Transaction Assessment Instrument, 48 C. RES. LIBR. 314 (1987); Isabel Schon et al., A Special Motivational Intervention Program and Junior High School Students'Library Use and Attitudes, 53 J. EXPERI. EDUC. 97 (1984-85); Beth J. Shapiro & Philip M. Marcus, Library Use, Library Instruction, and User Success, RES. STRATEGIES, Spring 1987, at 60; Howard D. White, Measurement at the Reference Desk, 17 DREXEL LIBR. Q. 3 (Winter 1981).
54. See, e.g., Charles A. Bunge, Factors Related to Reference Question Answering Success: The Development of a Data-Gathering Form, 24 RQ 482 (1985); Marjorie E. Murfin & Gary M. Gugelchuk, Development and Testing of a Reference Transaction Assessment Instrument, 48 C. RES. LIBR. 314 (1987); Isabel Schon et al., A Special Motivational Intervention Program and Junior High School Students'Library Use and Attitudes, 53 J. EXPERI. EDUC. 97 (1984-85); Beth J. Shapiro & Philip M. Marcus, Library Use, Library Instruction, and User Success, RES. STRATEGIES, Spring 1987, at 60; Howard D. White, Measurement at the Reference Desk, 17 DREXEL LIBR. Q. 3 (Winter 1981).
55. See, e.g., Charles A. Bunge, Factors Related to Reference Question Answering Success: The Development of a Data-Gathering Form, 24 RQ 482 (1985); Marjorie E. Murfin & Gary M. Gugelchuk, Development and Testing of a Reference Transaction Assessment Instrument, 48 C. RES. LIBR. 314 (1987); Isabel Schon et al., A Special Motivational Intervention Program and Junior High School Students'Library Use and Attitudes, 53 J. EXPERI. EDUC. 97 (1984-85); Beth J. Shapiro & Philip M. Marcus, Library Use, Library Instruction, and User Success, RES. STRATEGIES, Spring 1987, at 60; Howard D. White, Measurement at the Reference Desk, 17 DREXEL LIBR. Q. 3 (Winter 1981).
56. See, e.g., Charles A. Bunge, Factors Related to Reference Question Answering Success: The Development of a Data-Gathering Form, 24 RQ 482 (1985); Marjorie E. Murfin & Gary M. Gugelchuk, Development and Testing of a Reference Transaction Assessment Instrument, 48 C. RES. LIBR. 314 (1987); Isabel Schon et al., A Special Motivational Intervention Program and Junior High School Students'Library Use and Attitudes, 53 J. EXPERI. EDUC. 97 (1984-85); Beth J. Shapiro & Philip M. Marcus, Library Use, Library Instruction, and User Success, RES. STRATEGIES, Spring 1987, at 60; Howard D. White, Measurement at the Reference Desk, 17 DREXEL LIBR. Q. 3 (Winter 1981).
57. See, e.g., Charles A. Bunge, Factors Related to Reference Question Answering Success: The Development of a Data-Gathering Form, 24 RQ 482 (1985); Marjorie E. Murfin & Gary M. Gugelchuk, Development and Testing of a Reference Transaction Assessment Instrument, 48 C. RES. LIBR. 314 (1987); Isabel Schon et al., A Special Motivational Intervention Program and Junior High School Students'Library Use and Attitudes, 53 J. EXPERI. EDUC. 97 (1984-85); Beth J. Shapiro & Philip M. Marcus, Library Use, Library Instruction, and User Success, RES. STRATEGIES, Spring 1987, at 60; Howard D. White, Measurement at the Reference Desk, 17 DREXEL LIBR. Q. 3 (Winter 1981).
58. Some might be surprised by the high number of students in Table 1 who graduated with honors. Due to a grading curve which requires a teacher to assign 60 percent of students a grade of B or higher, a very large percentage of any graduating class will have the 3.0+ GPA necessary for graduation honors.
59. The only important measure of academic success not included in this case study is whether or not the student had a job waiting upon graduation. This information was not available to the author.