Abstract
This article reports on the results of a study of tenure and promotion procedures at U.S. institutions where academic librarians are faculty. The author surveyed librarians from 200 institutions of higher education on promotion and tenure issues, and received 104 responses. Topics covered include: who performs reviews, whether organizations use library committees and/or university wide ones, how many external reviewers are used and what they are asked to review, and what documentation guides these processes. The results were compared for (1) institutional control (public/private), (2) small, medium, and large institutions, and (3) simplified basic Carnegie classification. The statistical results are presented.
Highlights
Participating in the promotion and tenure (P&T) process is standard operating procedure in the lives of about half of academic librarians (Walters 2016; Vesper and Kelley 1997)
Six of the studies discussed in the literature review targeted different populations than this study (i.e., Association of Research Libraries (ARL) libraries in Bicknell-Holmes and Logan-Peters; Carnegie research libraries in Leysen and Black and Garner, Davidson, and Schwartzkopf; ARL libraries with faculty librarians in Smith et al.; librarians who have published in two top-tier journals in Best and Kneip; and both libraries with faculty librarians and those without in Vesper and Kelley)
Library P&T committees are more common at public institutions (Vesper and Kelley 1997; this study)
Summary
Participating in the promotion and tenure (P&T) process is standard operating procedure in the lives of about half of academic librarians (Walters 2016; Vesper and Kelley 1997). This article will not address criteria and standards for P&T, but rather focus on procedures
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
