ISSN: 2474-3542 Journal homepage: http://journal.calaijol.org Academic Library Leadership: Race and Gender Binh P. Le Abstract: Nearly 80% of American librarians are women. Similarly, the majority of American librarians are White; people of color – e.g., African Americans, Asian Americans, and Latino Americans – represent a small percentage of the U.S. library workforce. Throughout history, library leadership positions, regardless of the type of library (e.g., academic, public, or special), have been held by White males. This library leadership landscape was significantly altered following the enactment of a number of progressive laws and affirmative action programs, starting with the passage of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The problem, however, is that not every underrepresented group benefit from these laws and programs (hereafter policies). In fact, based on the present study, it appears that these policies have done little to help increase the number of people of color who are library directors in some of America’s largest and most prestigious academic libraries. To cite this article: Le, B. P. (2021). Academic library leadership: race and gender. International Journal of Librarianship, 6(1), 13-26. https://doi.org/10.23974/ijol.2021.vol6.1.184 To submit your article to this journal: Go to https://ojs.calaijol.org/index.php/ijol/about/submissions https://ojs.calaijol.org/index.php/ijol/about/submissions INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LIBRARIANSHIP, 6(1), 13-26. ISSN: 2474-3542 Academic Library Leadership: Race and Gender Binh P. Le1 Pennsylvania State University, State College, PA, USA ABSTRACT Nearly 80% of American librarians are women. Similarly, the majority of American librarians are White; people of color – e.g., African Americans, Asian Americans, and Latino Americans – represent a small percentage of the U.S. library workforce. Throughout history, library leadership positions, regardless of the type of library (e.g., academic, public, or special), have been held by White males. This library leadership landscape was significantly altered following the enactment of a number of progressive laws and affirmative action programs, starting with the passage of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The problem, however, is that not every underrepresented group benefit from these laws and programs (hereafter policies). In fact, based on the present study, it appears that these policies have done little to help increase the number of people of color who are library directors in some of America’s largest and most prestigious academic libraries. Keywords: Academic Library Director, Minority Academic Library Director, Library Leadership, Title VII, Title IX, Affirmative Action Programs INTRODUCTION In trying to protect and to level the playing field for women and underrepresented groups in the workplace, including higher education, the U.S. Congress enacted a number of significant laws (e.g., Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title IX of the Education Amendment of 1972) starting in the mid-1960s. Additionally, the federal government also established a series of affirmative action programs shortly afterward. These policies have had many profound impacts on multiple aspects of American society. With regard to the library profession, for example, one effect of the implementation of these policies is that the number of women academic library directors has increased significantly (e.g., Hollis, 1999; Deyrup, 2004). Financially, many of these academic library directors, especially those in large academic libraries, are better compensated than their counterparts (e.g., deans) at the same institutions. The problem, however, is that not all of the underrepresented groups – e.g., African Americans, Asian Americans, or Latino Americans – that these policies were specifically designed to help have benefited equally from them. This paper is an attempt to look at whether these policies have helped to increase the number of minority library 1 The author wishes to thank to the editors and the two anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments. Le / International Journal of Librarianship 6(1) 14 directors at 33 large and prestigious U.S. academic libraries whose universities are ranked among the top 50 in the world. LITERATURE REVIEW The aim of this section is to provide a brief review of scholarly works, albeit scarce, relating to the representation of women and people of color in leadership positions in large academic libraries, most of which are members of the Association of Research Libraries (ARL). For decades, men have disproportionally occupied the position of library director at the major American academic libraries, especially the large and prestigious ones, such as the ARL libraries. However, the landscape of academic library leadership had begun to change, first gradually and then drastically, by the early 1980s. This shift in academic library leadership was the result of multiple forces, including the Civil Rights movement, the second wave of feminism (1960s-1980s), and especially the enactment of many significant laws prohibiting racial and gender discrimination in the workplace (e.g., Equal Pay Act of 1963 and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964), as well as in education (e.g., Title IX of the Education Amendment of 1972). It is worth noting that the first wave of feminism, which took place between 1848 and 1920, focused heavily on women’s suffrage. The second wave of feminism, besides fighting for political equality, aimed to dismantle social inequalities against women. Importantly, the second wave of feminism, unlike the first wave of feminism which comprised primarily middle-class White women, tended to be more inclusive. It included women from different social classes, political orientations (e.g., socialists), and racial groups. Barbara B. Moran wrote about the impact that some of these changes had on the increase in the number of women in library leadership positions in an article entitled “The Impact of Affirmative Action on Academic Libraries,” published in Library Trends in 1985. It was reported that, “the greatest numerical gains for women have been found in the mid-level administrative positions, especially the assistant and associate directors’ positions in both types of university libraries and in the department head level of the ARL group” (p. 214). According to Moran, however, the problem was that: There are a few more women directors, but the gains on that level are disappointing … The number of women directing the large university libraries was low in 1972 and remains low in 1982. In the non-ARL group, there were, in 1982, sixteen female directors (17.6 percent) up from five (5.6 percent) while in the ARL group there were twelve female directors (13.5 percent) in 1982 compared to two (2.2 percent) in 1972” (1985, p. 214). However, in a later study, Moran, Leonard, and Zellers (2009) found that: At the highest levels of administration in academic libraries, women still have not achieved parity; the percentage of women holding directors’ positions is still lower than the overall percentage of women working in academic libraries. However, in both ARL and Carnegie Liberal Arts libraries, the number of women in administration has increased dramatically (p. 222). Regarding the underrepresentation of people of color in top-level library leadership, Deborah R. Hollis’ 1999 article “Affirmative Action or Increased Competition: A Look at Women and Minority Library Deans,” published in the Journal of Library Administration, examined the Le / International Journal of Librarianship 6(1) 15 race and gender of the library directors of the 86 academic libraries in eight Division I athletic conferences of the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). Hollis (1999) found that the number of female directors doubled between 1986 and 1992 (p. 69). In terms of racial categories, Hollis pointed out that “white women have made substantial gains in the last twelve years with promotion to the top-level ranks in eighty-six major academic libraries” (p. 70). At the same time, the number of librarians of color holding leadership positions in major academic and research libraries continued to be small. Hollis’ study also omitted lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) academic library leaders. It is understandable why this group was omitted from Hollis’ study: data on LGBTQ people in the library profession were not readily available. Hollis (1999) attributed the absence of statistical data on LGBTQ people to the neglect of government agencies (e.g., the U.S. Census Bureau) and professional organizations (e.g., the American Library Association) (p. 51) in collecting them. While Sharon K. Epp’s study (2008) focused on the leadership skills that African American women “need in order to be successful leaders in today’s Association of Research Libraries,” the author did allude to the fact that African American women are underrepresented in library leadership positions (p. 255). With regard to Asian Americans serving in the top-level library leadership positions, Le (2015) as well as Zhou and Lim (2012), found that Asian Americans are also underrepresented in library leadership positions, including in large academic and research libraries. In fact, only a handful of Asian Americans hold the position of library director in over 3,500 U.S. academic libraries. Ominously, the number of Asian American library directors has further decreased because of recent retirements. Interestingly with the number of women library directors, most of whom are White, increasing substantially since the 1980s, Deyrup (2004) believed that the battle for gender, economic, and professional parity in academic library leadership may be over. In an article titled “Is the Revolution Over? Gender, Economic, and Professional Parity in Academic Library Leadership Positions,” published in College & Research Libraries in 2004, Deyrup stated that, “the number of library women directors more than doubled between 1982 and 1997 and from 22.4 to 45.2 percent, and as the statistics have shown, women now dominate leadership positions in academic libraries” (p. 245). Furthermore, according to Deyrup, “Women library directors at the top institutions are generally much better compensated … And it must be remembered that the majority of these ARL directors are now women” (p. 244). The literature on the race and gender of American academic library directors is scarce. Indeed, most of the work and its accompanying data discussed above were published a number of years, if not decades, ago. It is now worth taking a look at the gender and race of America’s academic library directors whose universities have been ranked among the top 50 in the world, to determine whether the gender and racial composition has changed. Different universities use different titles for the highest administrator responsible for their libraries. These titles include University Librarian, Library Director, Dean of libraries, Vice Provost/President for Information, and Chief Librarian, among others. For the sake of uniformity, the title “library director” will be used throughout the paper. Le / International Journal of Librarianship 6(1) 16 METHODOLOGY This paper examines the racial and gender composition of the library directors of the American academic libraries whose universities are among the top 50 internationally ranked institutions by U.S. News & World Report (2019) and Times Higher Education (2019). U.S. News & World Report stated that, “these institutions from the U.S. and more than 60 other countries have been ranked based on 13 indicators that measure their academic research performance and their global and regional reputations” (Morse & Vega-Rodriguez, 2019). Times Higher Education also utilizes 13 academic performance indicators. They are grouped into five areas: teaching, research, citations, international outlook, and industry income. Since the inception of these rankings, many critics have argued that the rankings produced by these organizations tend to be subjective and reward prestige and wealth (Jaschik, 2018). They have been particularly critical of the criteria used by U.S. News & World Report for its annual rankings of American colleges and universities (Nietzel, 2019a; Nietzel, 2019b; Tierney, 2013). However, regarding the rankings of international universities, these organizations have utilized objective and measurable criteria. Consequently, their rankings are more credible. In fact, their rankings have been used by many institutions and governments in helping to establish educational policies. For example, according to Susan Adams, Times Higher Education … emphasizes scholarship, research funding and reputation and does not consider things like entry requirements, graduation rates, professor ratings or alumni salaries. We think THE’s [Times Higher Education] list is worth covering because it’s become one of the most respected international university rankings, cited in higher education legislation in countries like Russia and India, which hope to boost their institutions’ stature (Adams, 2019). Each of the two lists ranked over 1200 universities around the globe. This paper identifies only the U.S. universities that were ranked among the top 50 from each list. Times Higher Education included 23 U.S. universities among its top 50 globally ranked institutions (see Table 1). In U.S. News & World Report’s list, 29 U.S. universities made the top 50 (see Table 2). Many of these top U.S. universities appear in both lists. In hopes of yielding additional universities, the author used both lists to draw up a combined list of globally ranked U.S. universities, which resulted in a total number of 33. The goal of this paper is to elicit information about the race and gender of the library directors at these top 33 U.S. universities. The research was conducted between April 15, 2020 and June 30, 2020. The author searched each university’s website to identify the name, title, gender, and race of each library director. The author took screenshots of the pages found, making sure that the furnished text and image (picture of the library director) were captured for the record. The author identified the race and gender of the library directors by examining the photos included on the websites. Information on whether any of these library directors are gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, or queer could not be found from these websites. Because of the high quality of the photos (e.g., high resolution and discernable colors), the author was able to identify the racial backgrounds (e.g., Black, White, or Asian) and the gender identities (e.g., male or female) of the subjects in this study. Additionally, the author, who has been a professional librarian for a significant number of years and an active member of the library profession nationally and internationally, has met, seen, or interacted with a number of these Le / International Journal of Librarianship 6(1) 17 library directors at national and international conferences. In other words, the author’s familiarity with the subjects through professional activities has further allowed him to identify the race and gender. However, by relying on a visual inspection of the photos and given his limited familiarity with the subjects of the study, the author faced some challenges in identifying the race and gender. For example, the author could not ascertain whether a subject in this study is a mixed-raced person based on the color of his/her skin as shown in the photos or on an encounter the author may have had with a subject through professional activities. Similarly, the author could not determine whether a subject in this study is a transgender person. Additionally, because of the need to comply with U.S. privacy laws the author did not attempt to contact the subjects or their institutions for information pertaining to their race and gender. Table 1. Times Higher Education’s Global University Rankings (numerical order). Source: Times Higher Education (2019). University Country 1 University of Oxford United Kingdom 2 California Institute of Technology United States 3 University of Cambridge United Kingdom 4 Stanford University United States 5 Massachusetts Institute of Technology United States 6 Princeton University United States 7 Harvard University United States 8 Yale University United States 9 University of Chicago United States 10 Imperial College United Kingdom 11 University of Pennsylvania United States 12 Johns Hopkins University United States 13 University of California, Berkeley United States 14 ETH Zurich Switzerland 15 UCL United Kingdom 16 Columbia University United States 17 University of California, Los Angeles United States 18 University of Toronto Canada 19 Cornell University United States 20 Duke University United States 21 University of Michigan, Ann Arbor United States 22 Northwestern University United States 23 Tsinghua University China 24 Peking University China 25 National University of Singapore Singapore 26 University of Washington United States 27 Carnegie University United States 28 London School of Economics and Political Science United Kingdom 29 New York University United States 30 University of Edinburgh United Kingdom 31 University of California, San Diego United States 32 LMU Munich Germany 33 University of Melbourne Australia 34 University of British Columbia Canada 35 University of Hong Kong Hong Kong 36 King’s College London United Kingdom Le / International Journal of Librarianship 6(1) 18 37 University of Tokyo Japan 38 Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne Switzerland 39 Georgia Institute of Technology United States 40 University of Texas, Austin United States 41 Karolinska Institute Sweden 42 McGill University Canada 43 Technical University of Munich Germany 44 Heidelberg University Germany 45 KU Leuven Belgium 46 Paris Sciences et Lettres-PSL Research University Paris France 47 The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology Hong Kong 48 University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign United States 49 Nanyang Technological University Singapore 50 Australia National University Australia Table 2. U.S. News & World Report’s Global University Rankings (numerical order). Source: U.S. News & World Report (2019). University Country 1 Harvard University United States 2 Massachusetts Institute of Technology United States 3 Stanford University United States 4 University of California, Berkeley United States 5 University of Oxford United Kingdom 6 California Institute of Technology United States 7 Columbia University United States 8 Princeton University United States 9 University of Cambridge United Kingdom 10 University of Washington United States 11 Johns Hopkins University United States 12 Yale University United States 13 University of Chicago United States 14 University of California, Los Angeles United States 15 University of California, San Francisco United States 16 University of Pennsylvania United States 17 University of Michigan, Ann Arbor United States 18 University of Toronto Canada 19 University of California, San Diego United States 20 Imperial College London United Kingdom 21 University College London United Kingdom 22 Duke University United States 23 Cornell University United States 24 Northwestern University United States 25 University of Melbourne Australia - University of Sydney Australia 27 University of Edinburgh United Kingdom 28 University of British Columbia Canada 29 Washington University United States 30 University of Copenhagen Denmark 31 University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill United States Le / International Journal of Librarianship 6(1) 19 32 Singapore National University Singapore 33 University of Texas, Austin United States 34 Tsinghua University China 35 King’s College London United Kingdom 36 Sorbonne Universite France 37 University of Wisconsin, Madison United States 38 University of Amsterdam Netherlands 39 University of California, Santa Barbara United States 40 University of Queensland Australia 41 University of Munich Germany 42 Ecole Polytechnique Federale of Lausanne Switzerland 43 Ohio State University United States 44 University of Minnesota United States 45 University of Pittsburgh United States 46 McGill University Canada 47 University of Colorado United States 48 Boston University United States 49 Karolinska Institute Sweden 50 King Abdulaziz University Saudi Arabia RESULTS AND ANALYSES Unsurprisingly, many American universities dominate the rankings of the top universities in the world. Among these 33 universities, 17 are private and 16 are public. Interestingly, 17 of the 23 U.S. universities ranked by Times Higher Education are private, whereas 15 of the 29 ranked by U.S. News & World Report are private. Geographically, the majority of these universities are located on the East Coast, the Midwest, and the West Coast of the U.S. Furthermore, for the most part, these universities are located in or near major metropolitan areas such as Boston, New York City, Chicago, Los Angles, and San Francisco. Significantly, the libraries at 27 of these 33 universities are members of the ARL. The non-ARL member universities include Carnegie Mellon University, the California Institute of Technology, Stanford University, the University of California at Santa Barbara, the University of California at San Diego, and the University of California at San Francisco. The ARL comprises 122 of the largest and most prestigious academic and research libraries in North America. Gender Among the 33 library directors identified in this study, 12 (or 36%) are men and 21 (or 64%) are women (see Table 3). Twelve women hold the position of library director at (12) private universities; the other nine women hold the same position at (9) public universities. Five men hold the position of library director at (5) private universities; the other seven men hold the same title at (7) public universities. It is worth noting that women hold the library director position at five (out of six ranked) Ivy League libraries, including Harvard, Yale, Columbia, Princeton, and the University of Pennsylvania. It is also worth noting that women occupy the library directorship at some of the world-renowned science- and technology-centered universities such Le / International Journal of Librarianship 6(1) 20 as the California Institute of Technology, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and the Georgia Institute of Technology. Table 3. Gender and Race of University Librarians of the 33 Internationally Ranked U.S. Universities (alphabetical order) Sources: U.S. News & World Report (2019); Times Higher Education (2019). University Gender Race Boston University Male Black Carnegie Mellon University Male White California Institute of Tech. Female White Columbia University Female White Cornell University Male White Duke University Female White Georgia Institute of Tech. Female White Harvard University Female White Johns Hopkins University Male White Mass. Institute of Tech. Female White New York University Female White Northwestern University Female White Ohio State University Male White Princeton University Female White Stanford University Male White University of California (B) Male White University of California (LA) Female White University of California (SB) Female White University of California (SD) Male White University of California (SF) Male White University of Chicago Female White University of Colorado Male White University of Illinois Male White University of Michigan Male White University of Minnesota Female White University of North Carolina Female Black University of Pennsylvania Female White University of Pittsburgh Female White University of Texas Female White University of Washington Female White University of Wisconsin Female White Washington University Female Black Yale University Female White The findings in this study concerning the gender composition of the library directorship at the globally ranked U.S. universities confirms the previous studies on the issue (e.g., Sullivan 1996; Hollis, 1999; and Deyrup 2004). Broadly, the number of women library directors has increased significantly over the past few decades. The drastic growth of women library directors, however, occurred in large academic and research libraries (Deyrup, 2004). The main factors contributing to the increase in the number of women library directors, according to Deyrup (2004), are as follows: Le / International Journal of Librarianship 6(1) 21 Unlike their predecessors, these female academic library directors – now in their fifties and sixties – directly benefited from the feminist movement. They were part of the first generation of women to reap the rewards from the implementation of Title IX in 1972. This federal regulation prohibited discrimination in higher education and made it possible for women who worked within academic librarianship to be promoted and gain leadership status (p. 245). Undoubtedly, the various movements (e.g., Organization for Women and Women Strike for Peace) of the Second Wave of Feminism, the enactment of anti-discriminatory laws and policies, and other societal forces have certainly opened up leadership opportunities for many women in multiple professional areas of employment, including the library profession. It must be noted, however, that many professional organizations, including the ALA and the ARL, have also assisted in opening up library leadership paths for many women by establishing a number of high- level leadership development programs. Starting in the early 2000s, a number of such programs have been instituted to prepare librarians to become leaders in their profession. For example, programs such as the Leading Change Institute (previously known as the Frye Leadership Institute), the ARL’s Research Leadership Fellows Program, UCLA’s Senior Fellows Program, and the ACRL/Harvard Leadership Institute for Academic Librarians have produced a number of library directors, including the ones holding the library directorship at these globally ranked U.S. universities. In fact, eight library directors, six of whom are women that are included in this study, participated in the yearlong ARL’s Research Leadership Fellows Program. [It is worth noting that in order to participate in the yearlong ARL Research Leadership Fellows Program, the participants must work in one of the ARL libraries.] The impact of these high-level leadership development programs cannot be overlooked (Neely, 2009, p. 831). Take the ARL’s Research Leadership Fellows Program as an example. German, Owen, Parchuck and Sandore (2012) reported that: The results of the survey give evidence that the ARL RLF program has achieved the goals it set out … The survey results confirm the success of the program. Sponsors and fellows each described the noticeable impact of the program on the profession, the institutions and on the participants themselves. A pool of talented leaders has been created and tapped for top positions. A significant number of the participants have moved on and up the leadership ranks directly following the program (p. 806). Statistically, the majority of the participants in these high-level leadership development programs have been women. For example, the 2018-2019 ARL Leadership Fellows Program included 6 men and 22 women (ARL, 2020). Similarly, the 2019 Leading Change Institute cohort comprised a significant number of women, most of whom hold mid-level library administrative positions (Leading Change Institute, 2020). It is worth noting that the Leading Change Institute is a highly respected higher education leadership development organization. In fact, since its inception in 2000, many of its participants have been appointed to senior-level library leadership positions at many large academic and research libraries in the United States and Canada. All in all, these high-level leadership development programs have significantly contributed and continue to contribute to the increase in the number of women in top-level library leadership positions in large academic libraries. Interestingly, because of the tremendous progress that has been made in the area of propelling women into leadership positions, many scholars (e.g., Moran, Leonard, and Zellar, 2009) believe that the gender gap in academic library administration has been obliterated. Le / International Journal of Librarianship 6(1) 22 Race Of the 33 library directors in this study, 30 (or 90%) are White and 3 (10%) are African American (see Table 3). Of the three African American library directors, there are two women and one man. One of the two female library directors works at a private university; the other works at a public university. The male library director works at a private (parochial) university. Asian Americans, Latino Americans, and Native Americans are not represented in this group. Clearly White library directors, especially White women, continue to dominate the leadership positions in large academic libraries. This is not a new phenomenon. As noted above, the underrepresentation of people of color in leadership positions in libraries, especially in the large and prestigious research libraries, has been addressed in a number of studies dating back to the early 1980s (e.g., Epps, 2008, Hollis, 1999, p. 50). For example, in discussing the underrepresentation of African Americans in senior- level positions in the libraries of the Association of Research Libraries, Epps (2008) stated: Throughout the years, a number of African American women have emerged as influential leaders in librarianship – Clara Stanton Jones, Carla Hayden, and Althea Jenkins, to name a few. Despite the prominence of African American women and women of color, in general, on the national landscape of leadership in librarianship, the number of African American women holding leadership positions as deans, directors, or assistant/associate deans/directors of Association of Research Libraries (ARL) is extremely low and does not reflect proportionally the number of African American librarians in ARL libraries (p. 255). Similarly, Asian Americans are also underrepresented in library leadership positions. Zhou (2012) contended that Asian Americans, despite being highly educated, are severely underrepresented in the top leadership positions in higher education (p. 1). He further stated that “Although AAPI [Asian American/Pacific Islander] librarians are more educated than general credentialed librarians, and have published more, with similar years of experience, their probability to be represented at the top leadership level is one third of Whites and one half of Blacks according to this research” (p. 1). It is worth noting that while scholarly studies on the underrepresentation of African Americans and Asian Americans have appeared, albeit scarce, in the library leadership literature, no in-depth analyses of this topic on other racial and ethnic groups (e.g., Latino Americans, Native Americans) can be found. This is rather surprising, because over the years a small number of Latino Americans have held senior-level leadership positions in the libraries of the Association of Research Libraries (e.g., Colorado State University) as well as in the American Library Association. In fact, two Latino American women had served as president of the American Library Association. Many of these studies were conducted more than two decades ago. Today, 20 later, the situation has not changed at all, in spite of the establishment of progressive laws and library leadership development programs. Roger C. Schonfeld and Liam Sweeney (2017), the authors of Inclusion, Diversity, and Equity: Members of the Association of Research Libraries: Employee Demographics and Director Perspectives, commissioned by the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, reported: “We found that as positions become increasingly senior, they also become increasingly white” (p. 8). Interestingly, the hiring process seemed to be the cause of this phenomenon. For example, according to Schonfeld and Sweeney, “Directors acknowledge these barriers, and claim Le / International Journal of Librarianship 6(1) 23 that they primarily occur at the application pool stage of the interview process and are most commonly a result of geographic location” (p. 31). The problem, however, is that Schonfeld and Sweeney found that “we did not notice a difference in the race/ethnicity composition for responding ARLs based on their degree of urbanization” (p. 31). Many factors contribute to the underrepresentation of people of color in top library leadership positions. In fact, it is much more complicated than just the hiring process and geography. For example, Lauren Rivera, professor of management at Northwestern University, in her 2012 study, found that employers tend to look beyond technical skills required for the jobs. In fact, she pointed out that employers seek “candidates who were not only competent but culturally similar to themselves in terms of leisure pursuits, experiences, and self-presentation of styles (2012, p. 999). The problem, however, is that the higher education leaders (e.g., provosts, presidents) who hire library directors are mostly White. It is unlikely that, as Rivera discovered, they will hire people who do not share similar social and cultural backgrounds. In response to these challenges, a number of attempts have been made to address the underrepresentation of people of color in the senior-level leadership positions in different types of libraries. Among these, in addition to the high-level leadership development programs, have been the creation of many mid-level leadership development programs and institutes (e.g., ARL Leadership and Career Development Program, ALA Emerging Leaders, and Aurora Library Leadership Institute) by national and state library organizations. These mid-level leadership development programs were designed to offer librarians from various social, racial, and economic backgrounds opportunities to acquire essential leadership skills and to become library leaders. Over the years, a small number of librarians of color have been chosen to participate in these mid- level leadership development programs, some of whom subsequently assumed senior-level library leadership positions. However, many librarians of color could not participate in these mid-level (e.g., department heads, project leaders/managers, and unit heads) leadership development programs. A number of factors may have prevented their participation. First, it is costly to participate in many of these programs. The costs include travel, program fees, housing, and other expenses. While some may receive financial support from their institutions or scholarships, they still have to spend a substantial amount of their own money to attend. Second, many of these programs require the participants to commit a considerable amount of time, ranging from a week to a year or longer. For many, leaving a family or a job for an extended period of time is not a viable option. It is particularly difficult for those with family obligations and/or those libraries with limited resources. Third, a major and important leadership development program such as the ARL Leadership and Career Development Program only selects participants from the libraries of the ARL. ARL statistics indicate that a good number of librarians of color work in the 100 plus ARL libraries (ARL, 2020). However, the vast majority of librarians of color are employed in the other 3500 plus academic libraries throughout the United States. In other words, a significant number of librarians of color may have been excluded from some of the leadership development programs such as that of the ARL. Lastly, many of these leadership development programs have faced difficulties in trying to recruit librarians of color into their programs. In addition to the factors discussed above, the fact is that there are not that many librarians of color in the profession from which to recruit. Over the years, despite a number of attempts (e.g., the ALA Spectrum Scholarship Program) by library organizations such as the ALA and the ACRL, among others, to recruit people of color into the profession, the number of librarians of color is still small. Simply put, there are Le / International Journal of Librarianship 6(1) 24 not enough librarians of color to feed the library profession’s leadership pipeline. Thus, unless the composition of the library workforce is significantly diversified, the existing library leadership landscape with regard to its racial composition is not going to be significantly altered. CONCLUSION Unquestionably, social movements and progressive governmental policies have significantly altered some aspects of the landscape of U.S. library leadership. In particular, these polices have effectively leveled the playing field for women to attain top-level leadership positions in all types of libraries (e.g., the Librarian of Congress is a woman), including the major academic libraries in this study whose universities are ranked among the top 50 institutions in the world. Basically, one may reasonably argue that the gender barrier has been eradicated in the area of leadership advancement for women in the library field. In terms of race, as this study has shown, there are very few people of color – African Americans, Asian Americans, Hispanic Americans, and Native Americans – holding library leadership positions in America’s most prestigious universities. Despite the ALA’s efforts and those of other professional organizations (the ALA’s Spectrum Scholarship Program and the ARL’s Initiative to Recruit a Diverse Workforce) to recruit people of color into the profession over the past several decades, the number of librarians who are people of color is still too small. And given the small number of people of color who are professional librarians, it is difficult to develop a sizable talented pool of potential library leaders who can compete for top-level library positions, including top positions in prestigious academic libraries. Additionally, societal biases, intentionally or unintentionally, continue to be a major barrier to the advancement of people of color into top-level leadership positions in numerous fields, including the library field. References Adams, S. (2019, September 26). The world university rankings: An expert list of the world’s best universities. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/susanadams/2018/09/26/an-expert-list- of-the-worlds-best-universities/#46d7a1164f02. Accessed 23 April 2020. Association of Research Libraries. (2020). 2018–2019 ARL Leadership Fellows. https://arl.secure.nonprofitsoapbox.com/focus-areas/arl-academy/leadership- development-programs/arl-leadership-fellows-program/2859-arl-leadership- fellows#.YOn1vz2SlPZ. Accessed 29 October 2020. Association of Research Libraries. 2020. ARL Annual Salary Survey 2019–2020. https://publications.arl.org/ARL-Annual-Salary-Survey-2019-2020/. Accessed 20 October 2020. Dewey, B. I. (2009). The imperative for diversity: ARL’s progress and role. Portal: Libraries and the Academy, 9(3), 355-361. Dewey, B., & Keally, J. (2008). Recruiting for diversity: Strategies for twenty-first century research librarianship. Library Hi Tech, 26(4), 622-629. Deyrup, M. M. (2004). Is the revolution over? Gender, economic, and professional parity in academic library leadership positions. College & Research Libraries, 65(3), 242-250. Epps, S. K. (2008). African American wleaders in academic research libraries. Portal: Libraries and the Academy, 8(3), 255-272. Le / International Journal of Librarianship 6(1) 25 German, L., Owen, V., Parchuck, J., & Sandore, B. (2012). RLLF in the rear-view mirror: A report on the impact and value of the ARL Academic Library Leadership Fellows program. Journal of Library Administration, 49(8), 795-809. Hollis, D. R. (1999). Affirmative action or increased competition: A look at women and minority library deans. Journal of Library Administration, 27(1&2), 49-75. Jaschik, S. (2018, September 10). The ‘U.S. News’ rankings’ (faux) embrace social mobility. Inside Higher Ed. https://www.insidehighered.com/admissions/article/2018/09/10/us- news-says-it-has-shifted-rankings-focus-social-mobility-has-it. Accessed 11 May 2020. Le, B. P. (2015). Attainment of academic library leadership by Asian Americans: Challenges and development. The Proceedings of the Association of College and Research Libraries Conference. Portland, Oregon, 28-39. Leading Change Institute. (2020). Distinguished Alumni. https://leadingchangeinstitute.org/alumni/#2018. Accessed 29 October 2020. Moran, B. (1985). The impact of affirmative action on academic libraries. Library Trends, 34(2), 200. Moran, B. B., Leonard, E., & Zellers, J. (2009). Women administrators in academic libraries: Three decades of change. Library Trends, 58(2), 215-228. Morse, R., & Vega-Rodriguez, J. (2019). How U.S. News calculated the best global universities rankings. U.S. News & World Report. https://www.usnews.com/education/best-global- universities/articles/methodology. Accessed 18 April 2020. Neely, T. Y. (2009). Assessing diversity initiatives: The ARL Leadership and Career Development Program. Journal of Library Administration 49(8), 811-835. Nietzel, M. T. (2019, October 26). U.S. News names its best global universities: American institutions are at the top. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaeltnietzel/2019/10/26/us-news-releases-its-best- global-universities-rankings-american-institutions-are-at-the-top/#ea6a23946e39. Accessed 28 May 2020. Nietzel, T. Y. (2019, September 9). U.S. News releases its annual college rankings: Here’s what’s wrong with them. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaeltnietzel/2019/09/09/us- news-releases-its-annual-college-ranking-heres-whats-wrong-with-it/#2d359839a5c1. Accessed April 20, 2020. Rivera, L. A. (2012). Hiring as cultural matching: The case of elite professional service firms. American Sociological Review, 77(6), 999-1022. Schonfeld, R. C., & Sweeney, L. (2017). Inclusion, diversity, and equity: Members of the Association of Research Libraries: Employee demographics and director perspectives. New York, NY: The Mellon W. Foundation. Sullivan, C. J. (1996). Affirmative action and women in academic libraries: How far have we come? Master’s Thesis, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Tierney, J. (2013, September 10). Your annual reminder to ignore the U.S. News & World Report College Rankings. The Atlantic. https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2013/09/your-annual-reminder-to-ignore- the-em-us-news-world-report-em-college-rankings/279103/. Accessed 11 May 2020. U.S. News & World Report. (2019). Best global universities rankings. U.S. News & World Report. https://www.usnews.com/education/best-global-universities/rankings. Accessed 20 May 2020. https://www.usnews.com/education/best-global-universities/articles/methodology https://www.usnews.com/education/best-global-universities/articles/methodology https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2013/09/your-annual-reminder-to-ignore-the-em-us-news-world-report-em-college-rankings/279103/ https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2013/09/your-annual-reminder-to-ignore-the-em-us-news-world-report-em-college-rankings/279103/ Le / International Journal of Librarianship 6(1) 26 U.S. News & World Report. (2019). U.S. News unveils 2019 best global universities. https://www.usnews.com/info/blogs/press-room/articles/2018-10-30/us-news-unveils- 2019-best-global-universities-rankings. Accessed 21 May 2020. Times Higher Education. (2019). World university rankings 2019. https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings/2019/world- ranking#!/page/0/length/25/sort_by/rank/sort_order/asc/cols/stats. Accessed 28 April 2020. Zhou, J., & Lim, A. (2012, September 19-23). Mapping the landscape of career advancement for minorities in libraries. A paper presented at the Joint Conference of Librarians of Color. Kansas City, MO. Zhou, J. (2012). Leadership achievement gap of Asian/Pacific American librarians. Doctoral dissertation. California State University, Sacramento. http://csus- dspace.calstate.edu/handle/10211.9/1890. Accessed 15 June 2020. About the author Binh P. Le, Ed.D. is a tenured library faculty member at the Pennsylvania State University. He holds the rank of librarian (full professor). His research interests include library leadership, higher education leadership, Asian American librarianship and leadership, and Asian American history and politics. 002-title-184-Article Text-931-2-11-20210624 002-184-Article Text-938-2-11-20210624-Huang