ACRL News Issue (B) of College & Research Libraries


projects undertaken by CNI m em bers and is­
sues CNI m em bers are exploring w ere p re ­
sented and discussed. The m eeting schedule 
and a listing of the session topics and speakers 
is a v a ila b le  fro m  th e  CNI FTP file s  at 
F T P .C N I.O R G  in  d i r e c t o r i e s  / p u b / C N I /  
tf. meetings.

In addition to the project reports, WG m eet­
ings, and synergy sessions (which stimulate new 
ideas), the CNI m eeting contains several ple­
nary sessions w hich are focused around the 
meeting them e. This Novem ber’s them e was 
“Optimizing Public and Private Interests” and 
explored the relationships betw een the two and 
how  each can w ork effectively in a netw orked 
environm ent w hile minimizing the negative 
impact of one o n  the other.

Three plenary sessions w ere held on 1) the 
role of government, not-for-profit, and for-profit 
sectors in optimizing public and private inter­
ests; 2) optimizing public and private interest 
in the m anagem ent o f intellectual p roperty 
w hich looked at copyright, contract law, and 
licensing developm ents; and 3) optimization of 
public and private interests in the last mile of 
the network. More detailed summaries than can 
be provided here will be available as a m eet­
ing report at FTP.CNI.ORG in directories / p u b / 
CNI/tf.meetings.

There is probably no better summary of the 
w ork of CNI over the past three years than the 
w ords o f William Y. Arms (vice-president for 
com puting services, Carnegie Mellon Univer­
sity) near the conclusion of the meeting:

“Three years ago everybody [computer cen­
te r p e o p le , lib rarian s, a d m in istrato rs, etc.] 
thought differently; today w e have a com m on 
vocabulary.

“The Coalition for N etworked Information 
does n ot build the electronic library but has 
becom e a superb forum for those w ho do build 
and use it to m eet and w ork together.”

A lthough this topic w as n ot directly ad ­
dressed, there w as a strong undercurrent of 
concern about the n eed  to expand use of the 
netw ork to all sizes and types of libraries. Li­
braries of all sizes and constituencies are en ­
couraged to becom e active in managing and 
navigating the information world. The W ork­
ing Groups, for exam ple, often included pre­
sentations from libraries w hich only recently 
becam e involved with electronic resources, so 
it’s never too late to begin!

The next m eeting o f the Task Force o f CNI 
will be April 5-6, 1994, in W ashington, D.C. ■

Letters
Tenure is im po rtant
To the Editor:

I read with interest the essay by Beth Shapiro 
(N o v em b er 1993) in w h ic h  sh e ad v o c a te s 
dum ping faculty status for librarians. A few years 
ago I w ould have agreed completely with her, 
b ut som e empirical study modified my opin­
ion. (See my article in Library Adm inistration 
& M anagem ent (Fall 1990): 184-93.)

Faculty status w ithout ten u re is nothing. 
With tenure it is som ething of value, w hich I 
will here refer to simply as tenure. Note that 
tenure for general faculty is ubiquitous in four- 
year colleges and universities; it is not ubiqui­
tous among librarians. Without questioning why 
this dichotom y exists, Shapiro misses the point 
o f w hat faculty status for librarians represents. 
Answering questions about w hy tenure exists 
and [if] it should apply to librarians provides 
better rationale for a dum p faculty status deci­
sion than our anecdotal experience.

Long justified as the w ay to secure academic 
freedom  (the real myth), tenure exists prim a­
rily because it is the only quantitative m echa­
nism that monitors quality in academics. The 
tenure process delegates the hiring decision to 
the faculty w ho use this m echanism  as a means 
to assure them selves o f quality am ong their 
peers. . . .  At large research universities, the 
tenure process (i.e., faculty status for librarians) 
unfortunately im poses costs— in the form of 
diminished campuswide research productivity— 
w hich overw helm  its benefits. Shapiro is right 
in regard to those places. At teaching-oriented 
institutions (i.e., four-year liberal arts colleges) 
tenure helps to insure som e level o f scholar­
ship, which makes it possible for faculty to teach 
better. . . . Therefore, it w orks to elevate qual­
ity. Fortunately librarians at teaching institu­
tions often have more opportunity to help su p ­
port the instructional program by w orking with 
faculty than they do at research institutions. 
And, tenure here helps elevate quality among 
librarians with positive return to the product of 
those schools. T hese differences in cam pus 
agendas taken together provide som e expla­
nation of w hy tenure is ubiquitous among teach­
ing faculty and not am ong librarians.

A ppropriate action: dum p faculty status at 
Rice, k eep  it at Trinity.— R ichard W. Meyer, 
director o f  the library, Trinity University ■

ftp://FTP.CNI.ORG
ftp://FTP.CNI.ORG