ACRL College & Research Libraries News

College & Research Libraries News

ACRL Board of Directors

ANNUAL CONFERENCE DALLAS, TEXAS, 1971

Minutes

Monday, June 21, 1971—8:30-10:30 p.m.

Present: President, Anne C. Edmonds; Vice- President and President-Elect, Joseph H. Reason; Past President, Philip J. McNiff; Directorsat-Large, Mark M. Gormley, Norman E. Tanis, David C. Weber; Directors on ALA Council, Page Ackerman, Andrew J. Eaton, Warren J. Haas, James F. Holly, Andrew Horn, Robert K. Johnson, Sarah D. Jones, James O. Wallace; Chairmen of Sections, Carl H. Sachtleben, Joleen Bock, Julius Barclay, Eleanor Buist, David W. Heron; Vice-Chairmen and Chairmen-Elect of Sections, Carl R. Cox, Hal C. Stone; Executive Secretary, J. Donald Thomas; Professional Assistant, Jordan M. Scepanski; Administrative Assistant, Ilse F. Bridges.

Absent: Lee Ash, Robert H. Blackburn, Herbert A. Cahoon, Ralph H. Hopp, Wolfgang Freitag.

Visitors: Brendan Connolly, Stuart Forth, James F. Govan, Louis Jacob, Beverly Johnson, Arthur McAnally, Richard L. O’Keeffe, William R. Pullen, James Riddles, Eldred Smith, and others.

President Anne C. Edmonds presided and called the meeting to order. Mr. Stone moved that the minutes of the midwinter meetings of the ACRL Board of Directors be approved as published; Mr. Johnson seconded; the motion carried unanimously.

Miss Edmonds then read the 1971 ACRL election results. (See p.221)

Mr. Reason covered the Committee on Program Evaluation and Support report and its effect on ACRL. At the Budget Assembly on Saturday, June 19, it had been pointed out that the budget was out of balance. ACRL was affected in a number of areas. CHOICE will lose $50,000 from its surplus which will be used to support other ALA programs (the surplus had been intended to be used for expansion of programs and services, such as review of foreign language books, supplements, etc.). CRL News faces a cutback from the present eleven issues to six per year. Mr. Reason mentioned that Richard Dougherty, editor of CRL, spoke for the publication at the Budget Assembly and that the head of the production unit at ALA had written a memo pointing out that reducing the number of issues of the News would contribute very little, if anything, to the financial resources of ALA. Important advertising revenue would be lost, a point which had not been taken into consideration by COPES. ALA will fund joint committees, but requests for additional staffing were denied. Instead of two meetings for the Committee on Academic Status, funding for only one was approved. The $400 formerly allowed for the expenses of the division president will be cut in half. In answer to questions from the floor regarding the basis for reductions in allowances, Mr. Reason read the COPES criteria for allocating funds.

Mr. Reason then presented the following resolution for transmittal to the ALA Executive Board and the ALA Council and moved that it be approved.

Whereas the Board of Directors of the Association of College and Research Libraries is disturbed by the ALA budgeting procedures, and Whekeas the final form of the budget is not approved by the ALA Executive Board until after the close of the Annual Conference, therefore be it Resolved that the ALA Executive Board make public its action on the 1971/72 budget, and that this be reported to the final meeting of Council at Dallas on Friday, June 25, 1971.

Summary of Major Action by the ACRL Board of Directors Dallas, Texas, June 21 and 24, 1971

Passed a resolution urging that the divisions of ALA continue to have representatives on Council.

Supported an amendment to the proposed ALA Program of Action which would exclude academic librarians from its jurisdiction after August 31, 1972, and would provide for a special academic status officer.

Deplored the action of the Board of Regents of the University of Minnesota with regard to J. Michael McConnell.

Agreed to expand the current Association of American Colleges/ACRL Joint Committee to include representation from the American Association of University Professors.

Directed that an amendment to the constitution on mail voting procedures be submitted to membership.

Changed the name of the Rare Books Section to the Rare Books and Manuscripts Section.

Approved the amended version of the “Standards for Faculty Status for College and University Librarians” as adopted by the membership at the annual meeting.

Sent to the ALA Council the resolution passed by membership objecting to the cuts in funding for CHOICE and CRL News.

Established an Ad Hoc Committee on Bibliographic Instruction.

Approved the establishment of an Anthropology Subsection of the Subject Specialists Section.

Miss Edmonds advised that the American Association of School Librarians (AASL) Board of Directors had already approved a similar resolution. Mr. Reason added that he thought the budget was actually ready on Friday but is usually adopted on Saturday by the new Executive Board which will be in office for the new fiscal year.

After additional discussion, the resolution was unanimously approved. Mr. Reason explained that the Planning Committee, due to the conflicting meetings of other committees and the absence of some members, had not yet met during the conference, and thus he could not present a report.

Mr. Thomas was asked to report on dues paid by ACRL members, as he had been requested at Midwinter to secure these figures from Mr. Gaertner, ALA’s Comptroller. The figures received on May 1, 1971, indicated that the average dues for ACRL members are $63.76 while average dues paid by all ALA members are $43.45. (See Exhibit I) Miss Edmonds, on May 25, 1971, requested from Mr. David Clift, the Executive Director of ALA, a complete breakdown of membership dues by type of library. These figures, which were not received until today, June 21, 1971, differed considerably from those previously given to Mr. Thomas. (See Exhibit II) The discrepancy between the two sets could not be explained. Various questions were raised concerning the statistics. Mr. Heron inquired whether there was any indication what percentage of the 6,000 member drop in membership was absorbed by ACRL. Mr. Thomas replied that the percentage was quite small.

Miss Edmonds then covered the work of the Task Force on Goals, Structure and Finance. She pointed out that the materials which had been distributed prior to the meeting included statements from the Task Force. (See Exhibit III) She stated that last year at the Detroit conference membership had expressed its opinion on the reorganization of ALA by voting in favor of a federation of library associations, but that before any final steps can be taken, the officers want to be certain this was the feeling of the entire membership. It was pointed out that a mail ballot may be necessary. Definite reaction to the ACONDA report must be obtained. The Executive Committee was concerned, she said, about the elimination of division representatives on the ALA Council and had drawn up a resolution for the Board’s response. She mentioned that the Executive Committee had a joint meeting on Saturday with AASL representatives and that AASL had passed a similar resolution and presented it to the ALA Executive Board.

The resolution read as follows.

Whereas the Board of Directors of the Association of College and Research Libraries applauds the concept of a more responsive Council, as proposed in the ACONDA/ANACONDA reports, it does not support the specific recommendation of Item (3), (a), (b), and (c) as stated in the ACONDA revised recommendations of January 22, 1971, and Whereas this recommendation denies divisions of ALA the only opportunity for direct involvement in decision-making and policy development in the affairs of the American Library Association and the opportunity to be heard on matters relating to the libraries and librarians which form their constituencies, and Whereas in the form of the proposed recommendation there is no guarantee of equitable distribution of librarians from all of the various types of libraries and activities, therefore be it Resolved that until such time as the American Library Association is restructured, divisions should continue, as now, to have representatives on Council.

Miss Edmonds again called for the Board members’ reactions and then moved that the resolution be adopted. After some discussion, the measure was unanimously approved.

A short discussion on structure and goals followed. Miss Edmonds mentioned that this matter would be taken to the membership meeting on Thursday afternoon, June 24, 1971. Miss Jones questioned the financial implications of a federated or separate organization. Miss Edmonds stated that it was very hard to judge from the present COPES report how much it would cost to run a headquarters. Mr. Holly felt that, considering the concern of some ALA Council members about the selection and term of office for an Executive Director, thought should be given to eliminating the phrase “the Executive Director serves at the pleasure of the Executive Board. …” A provision might be made to replace the Executive Director, if so desired, in a democratic fashion, he said.

Mr. Forth, in his capacity as chairman of the Committee on Academic Status, then addressed the Board. He first discussed the proposed ALA Program of Action for Mediation, Arbitration and Inquiry and set forth the following for the Board’s consideration.

Recognizing certain shortcomings in the proposed ALA Program of Action for Mediation, Arbitration and Inquiry, the Committee on Academic Status of ACRL nevertheless agrees that this program is an important step in securing needed protection and support for ALA members. However, we also strongly believe that such a committee cannot adequately or appropriately protect the interests of academic librarians. Therefore, we propose the following amendment:

That this Committee shall not have jurisdiction over matters relating to the status and problems of academic librarians except on an interim basis; that this interim shall last only until August 31, 1972; and that appropriate steps be taken by ACRL and its Committee on Academic Status to establish and approve procedures for implementing and protecting the rights of academic librarians and secure ALA funding for its implementation by that date.

This procedure must include an ACRL academic status officer who shall be charged with the following responsibilities:

1. Collect information relating to the status of academic librarians across the country.
2. Provide information and assistance to academic librarians to achieve academic status.
3. Carry out an educational program regarding the rights and prerogatives of academic librarians.
4. Enter into mediation, arbitration, and inquiries regarding the rights and responsibilities of academic librarians.
5. Enforce effective sanctions established by ACRL which can be invoked for the protection of academic librarians.

The Committee on Academic Status will serve as an advisory committee to this officer.

Mr. Forth then moved that the above amendment be presented to the ALA Council. A discussion period followed. Miss Edmonds asked the Board if they would like to make some general observations on the Program of Action, which is to be voted on by the ALA Council, before taking action on the amendment. She pointed out the need for urgency due to the fact that fourteen of the seventeen cases presented to the Staff Committee on Mediation, Arbitration and Inquiry to date have involved academic librarians. Mr. Horn inquired whether AASL was also concerned about the Program of Action, and Mr. Forth replied that he had written to David Clift objecting to the Member-at-Large on the Staff Committee and suggested that a member of AASL be appointed instead. Apparently no attention had been paid to his suggestion. Miss Edmonds and Mr. Thomas both indicated that AASL had formally protested their omission from the Staff Committee. In response to Mr. Holly’s question as to the origin of the Program of Action, Miss Edmonds gave a short summary of its evolution. Mr. Weber then wondered if it were appropriate to ask Mr. Thomas for his comments. Mr. Thomas indicated that the Committee was of benefit and that it was important for librarians to be able to appeal to some organization. Miss Ackerman, speaking as chairman of the Library Administration Division’s Ad Hoc Tenure Investigation Committee, added that LAD had no interest in who has jurisdiction over investigations so long as they are handled promptly and are performed in a centralized way. Mr. Eaton asked if only ACRL would be involved in sanctions. Mr. Forth replied that this was not known as yet and depended on future developments. He pointed out that the Committee on Academic Status wants a strong stand on sanctions and standards. In replying to Mr. Haas’ question about the word “arbitration,” he said he thought that perhaps “negotiation” would be a better word, but “arbitration” is the term used in the document under discussion.

Miss Edmonds asked if there were further observations or discussions and Mr. Weber requested another reading of the proposed amendment. Miss Edmonds complied with his request. Mr. Eaton then observed that he thought the chances of getting ALA funding were about zero. COPES has recommended funding of this Program of Action, the money to come from other requests so it could be financed. Mr. Thomas explained that three units at headquarters requested funding for investigations—ACRL, LAD, and the Intellectual Freedom Committee. Some of the funds sought by the units were instead approved for the Staff Committee on Mediation, Arbitration and Inquiry by COPES, even though the Committee itself has not yet been approved by the ALA Council.

Mr. Weber voiced opposition to the motion by Mr. Forth and said he thought making minor changes in the proposed Program of Action, changes covering the Committee’s objections, would make the amendment more agreeable to the ALA Council. Mr. Holly questioned whether the proposal should be tabled until after the ACRL membership meeting in order that membership reaction could be obtained. Mr. Weber felt this was unnecessary. Miss Edmonds called for a vote on Mr. Forth’s motion. With sixteen members voting in favor and five opposed, the motion carried.^®

• For ALA Council action on the ACRL amendment see p.223 of this issue.

Mr. Forth then discussed the second item the Committee on Academic Status wanted to bring to the Board, a resolution concerning J. Michael McConnell and the University of Minnesota, which had been passed by the Committee on Academic Status on March 27, 1971. (See Exhibit IV) He mentioned that this case was still in litigation. The resolution was addressed to the “appropriate authorities.” After questioning who the appropriate authorities were, Mr. Johnson moved for a vote on the resolution previously moved by Mr. Forth. With one member voting in opposition, the ACRL Board passed the resolution of the Committee on Academic Status in support of Mr. McConnell.

Miss Edmonds next brought up the subject of an expansion of the Association of American Colleges/ACRL Joint Committee to include the American Associat'on of University Professors. On behalf of the Executive Committee of ACRL, she moved that the ACRL Board of Directors approve the establishment of a tripartite committee on college library problems consisting of three members and one staff member of each of the participating organizations, ACRL, AAUP, and AAC.

The motion was approved unanimously.

Miss Edmonds then called for new business. Mr. Tanis mentioned that he had passed out copies of the proposed “Guidelines for the Two Year College Library Learning Resources Center” to all Board members.

Miss Edmonds then adjourned the meeting.

Minutes

Thursday, June 24, 1971—4:30-6.00 p.m.

Present: President, Anne C. Edmonds; Vice- President and President-Elect, Joseph H. Reason; Past President, Philip J. McNiff; Directorsat-Large, Mark M. Gormley, Norman E. Tanis, David C. Weber; Directors on ALA Council, Page Ackerman, Andrew J. Eaton, James F. Holly; Chairman of Sections, Julius Barclay, Eleanor Buist; Vice-Chairmen and Chairmen- Elect of Sections, Carl R. Cox, Hal C. Stone; Executive Secretary, J. Donald Thomas; Professional Assistant, Jordan M. Scepanski; Administrative Assistant, Ilse F. Bridges.

Absent: Lee Ash, Robert Blackburn, Joleen Bock, Herbert A. Cahoon, Wolfgang Freitag, Warren J. Haas, David W. Heron, Ralph H. Hopp, Andrew Horn, Robert K. Johnson, Sarah D. Jones, Carl H. Sachtleben, James O. Wallace.

Visitors: Penny Abell, Richard Dougherty, Judy Fair, Stuart Forth, Louis Jacob, Roy Kidman, Arthur McAnally, Richard O’Keeffe, William R. Pullen, Roscoe Rouse, Eldred Smith, and others.

President Anne C. Edmonds presided.

The meeting was called to order and Miss Edmonds asked Mr. Reason to present the report of the Planning Committee. The first recommendation of the Committee was the discontinuance of the Library Surveys Committee due to inactivity. Mr. Gormley wanted to know where Mr. Tauber’s Handbook on Library Surveys would stand in case the Committee was dissolved. Mr. Thomas mentioned that he had seen Mr. Tauber and that Mr. Tauber had expressed his willingness to serve on the Committee, were it to remain in existence. Mr. Reason indicated he would drop the recommendation for discontinuance of the Library Surveys Committee, but wanted to know the exact understanding with Mr. Tauber. Mr. Thomas replied that Mr. Tauber had stated he would serve on the Committee, but not as its chairman. He said perhaps the Board should set a deadline as to when its report was to be submitted. Mr. McNiff suggested waiting until Midwinter; if there was no action on the part of the Committee by then, discontinuance should be recommended.

Mr. Eaton inquired as to the Board’s anticipated response to the ACONDA study. Miss Edmonds replied that the ACRL Planning Committee was looking at the study and that there were several possibilities for restructuring.

Miss Edmonds next called on Mr. Thomas for a discussion of the proposed ACRL Procedural Manual. He referred to the draft copies of Procedures on Appointments and Nominations and the ACRL Calendar which had been distributed to the Board members. (See Exhibit V) He requested recommendations and possible improvements thereto. He explained that they were designed to help eliminate many of the procedural problems encountered in the past and repeated that any suggestions would be most welcome.

Miss Edmonds then called on Mr. Pullen for the Constitution and Bylaws report. He briefly referred to a question put to his committee concerning the role of the ALA Councilor nominated by ACRL. The committee could find nothing in the constitution which would require a Councilor to vote the opinion of the Association.

Mr. Pullen then moved that the name of the committee be changed from the Ad Hoc Committee to Revise the ACRL Constitution and Bylaws to Ad Hoc Committee on the ACRL Constitution and Bylaws. Mr. Tanis seconded; the motion carried without opposition.

Mr. Pullen next read the following resolution which had been adopted by his Committee on June 22, 1971, for presentation to the Board.

It is proposed that Article IX of the ACRL Bylawsbe amended to read as follows:

Article IX. Mail Votes

Sec. 1. Mail votes of the membership of the Association may be authorized between meetings by the Board of Directors, provided all members are canvassed simultaneously. Such mail votes shall be conducted under the same requirements as votes at meetings. If no time limit is set, no vote shall be counted unless received within 30 days from the day the text of the matter voted upon was mailed properly addressed to those entitled to vote upon it.

Sec. 2. Mail votes of the Board of Directors may be taken provided they are authorized by the President, President-Elect, and Past President, and all voting Board members are canvassed simultaneously. An affirmative vote of three-fourths of the voting Board members shall be required to pass a motion. On each mail vote, each voting Board member shall have the option of voting for or against the motion, to abstain, or to hold for discussion at the next regularly scheduled meeting. Time limits shall be the same as stated above in Sec. 1 of this article.

Sec. 3. Mail Votes of duly constituted committees may be taken by the chairmen of such committees. An affirmative vote of three-fourths of the committee members shall be required to pass the motion. Voting option and time limits shall be the same as stated above in Sec. 2 of this article.

Mr. Weber moved that this resolution be submitted to the ACRL Membership for a vote. Mr. Barclay seconded; the motion carried unanimously. Following the vote, Miss Edmonds explained that an error had occurred during the past year in the mail voting procedures. Two motions which had been considered approved were not passed according to the provisions of Article IX of the Bylaws and thus must come to a vote again. The first one was a motion by Robert Grazier, Chairman of the ACRL Publications Committee, that the Board adopt official guidelines defining editorial and production functions vis-à-vis ACRL publications and the ALA Publishing Department. Miss Edmonds moved that this motion be approved and called for a vote. It was approved without dissent.

The second measure was a motion by Mr. Grazier that the Board adopt a proposal redefining the scope of the ACRL Monograph Series. Miss Edmonds again moved that the motion be approved and called for a vote, resulting in unanimous approval. (For the text of both motions, see the February 1971 issue of CRL News, p.31.)

Next on the agenda was the matter of an illegal motion concerning mail ballots made by

Mr. Weber at the January 18, 1971, session of the Board. Mr. Weber withdrew his motion formally, thus disposing of the matter.

Annual Conference and Midwinter/Interim Progress Reports of ACRL Units were taken up next. No oral reports were offered and thus the written reports stood as distributed. Miss Edmonds also asked for informational reports.

Mr. Tanis reported that the Committee on Standards and Accreditation had not approved the “Guidelines for the Two Year College Library Learning Resource Centers” but had decided to delay final acceptance for six months. It was agreed by his committee that the new guidelines should be reviewed on an annual basis.

Miss Judy Fair, the ACRL Representative on the ALA Membership Committee, brought up a question concerning the use of either flyers or brochures for membership promotion. She wanted an expression of opinion to take back to her committee. Mr. Weber inquired whether there was any indication through the Junior Members Round Table as to which might be most effective. Miss Fair did not know, but indicated that some divisions were considering sending out joint flyers with JMRT. No definite preference was expressed and Miss Edmonds concluded by stating that ACRL would rely on Miss Fair’s judgment in this matter.

Mr. Barclay, Chairman of the Rare Books Section, reported that his section wished to present two resolutions to the Board. He moved that the name of the Rare Books Section of ACRL be changed to the Rare Books and Manuscripts Section, motion carried. He then moved that the Ad Hoc Committee on Manuscript Collections of the Rare Books Section be dissolved and a permanent Committee on Manuscripts Collections be established within the Rare Books Section, motion carried.

Miss Edmonds then introduced the following resolution which had been submitted by the ACRL Publications Committee for action by the ACRL Board.

Be it resolved that the funding of all ACRL publications be the responsibility of the ACRL Board, said Board to establish annual budgets for all ACRL publications. The recent action of COPES in reducing the publication budget of CHOICE and the publishing program of CRL News drastically underscores the need for the ACRL Board to insure the existence of the Division’s publishing program.

Mr. Holly expressed his feeling that this resolution would create a problem both with respect to the ALA Bylaws and the ALA Publishing Board. Mr. Weber stated that perhaps it would be best not to take any action at this time in view of the possible conflict and the fact that Mr. Grazier, Chairman of the ACRL Publications Committee, was not present to explain further. He thought that the best course of action at the moment would be to let the ACRL officers work with the Publications Committee and then reconsider the matter at the Midwinter Meeting. Miss Edmonds remarked that perhaps the Board should recommend that a change be made in the appropriate bylaws. Mr. Dougherty, editor of CRL, spoke out strongly for self-determination for the divisional journals. He repeated that COPES takes arbitrary actions without considering individual cases or merits and mentioned that they had already ordered a cutback of 10 percent in the number of pages. He also mentioned that ALA provided no secretarial support at all to the editors, and that it was thus necessary to rely on the largesse of the institutions where the editors were employed, a most unfair situation and one which could create considerable hardship should an institution decide to withdraw support. Mr. Eaton stated that the Board depended on the Publications Committee for advice as to the publications program and that more input was needed. Mr. Dougherty brought out the fact that at the present time ACRL had nothing whatever to do with the funding of publications and that the matter was handled entirely by ALA. Mr. Eaton then wanted to know how COPES arrived at the decisions. Mr. Dougherty explained that they treat all publications alike regardless of whether they are self-supporting or not. Mr. Eaton asked Mr. Dougherty what the ACRL Board could do, and Mr. Dougherty replied that between now and Midwinter ACRL should develop a plan concerning all ACRL publications which would be acceptable and workable. He said that he would be very happy to work with Holly Campbell and Don Thomas on a pertinent study. Mr. Weber remarked that it was totally unreasonable to expect the Board to take action without any proper advance request. Mr. Holly inquired whether it was possible for the Board to ask for a detailed financial summary for ACRL publications with specific figures comparing expenses for the past year with the allocations for next year. Mr. McNiff wanted to know what part of ACRL dues were applied to the support of publications. Mr. Dougherty said that according to the official statement published in each issue of CRL, $5.00 of each member’s dues went to the support of the journal. If this money were actually received, CRL would have a budget surplus of $44,000. ALA loses money on divisional publications overall, but makes no differentiation in its treatment between those which make money and those which operate on a deficit.

Mr. Gormley moved to table the resolution of the Publications Committee. Mr. Tanis seconded and the motion carried. As a final thought on this subject, Mr. Weber suggested that the possibility of cooperating with other divisions in the field of publications be explored, and Mr. Dougherty stated that he understood a committee to study all divisional publications might be appointed.

Miss Edmonds now moved to several resolutions which had been passed by ACRL membership and had to be considered by the Board.

The first one concerned the “Standards for Faculty Status for College and University Librarians” as drawn up by the Committee on Academic Status and already approved in principle by the Board at Midwinter. The membership at its meeting earlier in the day approved the original version, with the exception of Item 4 on education which was deleted. Mr. McNiff moved, for the membership, that the “Standards for Faculty Status for College and University Librarians” (see CRL News, June 1971, p.170-72), as amended by the membership at the annual meeting, be approved. Mr. Weber felt that a mail vote of the entire membership should be taken as in his opinion the document, as passed, was excessive and would prove damaging. Miss Ackerman wanted to know if in that case the mail vote would be taken before any Board action. Mr. Tanis stated that the Board was the legal representative of the Association and thus, if the Board voted to approve the document, no mail vote could then be taken concerning it. Mr. Thomas interjected that the standards were presented to the membership as an interim document to be used by ACRL in its negotiations with the AAUP and the AAC. Miss Ackerman thought that that would make a difference since the Board could approve the standards as a negotiating instrument but not as official standards. Mr. Holly pointed out that the Board had already approved the statement in principle at an earlier meeting and that the membership clearly indicated they wanted it. He did not see how the Board could put it aside. Miss Ackerman asked if she could move that the Board authorize the Committee on Academic Status to use this document as a negotiating instrument with AAUP and AAC. The discussion then centered on how the Staff Committee on Mediation, Arbitration and Inquiry would be instructed to handle academic status matters while such negotiations were taking place. There being no further discussion, Miss Edmonds called for a vote on the original motion. The vote was unanimously in favor of approval.

The next item of business was the resolution presented by Mr. Beard and passed by the membership concerning the establishment of an Office for Academic Status. (See the minutes of the Annual Membership Meeting in this issue.) Mr. Tanis asked for a reading of the section of the ALA Bylaws referred to in the resolution, and Miss Edmonds read the appropriate paragraph. Mr. McNiff questioned whether the few people present at the meeting could speak for the entire membership and impose an additional fee. He suggested that first every effort should be made to obtain funding from ALA; if unsuccessful, then perhaps a mail vote might be necessary. Miss Ackerman pointed out that the amendment to the Program of Action which ACRL was recommending to Council indicates the date August 31, 1972, for the establishment of the Academic Status Office. Mr. Beard’s resolution advances this date by one year. She also said that by funding ACRL’s programs ourselves, we definitely run the danger of jeopardizing future funding from ALA. Mr. Holly wondered if perhaps an ad hoc committee should be formed to work on the matter. He then moved that Mr. Beard’s resolution be referred to the incoming ACRL President for early consideration by an ad hoc task force or committee. Mr. Gormley seconded, Miss Edmonds called for the vote, and the motion passed unanimously.

Miss Edmonds presented to the Board Mr. Grazier’s resolution that the COPES budget cuts were unacceptable to ACRL, and a general discussion ensued. It primarily centered on CHOICE and the fact that COPES proposed to use $50,000 of the total current cash balance of $53,000 for other ALA budget deficits. ALA/ACRL made a commitment that supplements of the CORE Collection would be published, but if the money is removed from the CHOICE account, this commitment could be jeopardized. Mr. Gormley then moved that the resolution passed by the membership be approved as presented and passed on to the ALA Council for information purposes. (See the minutes of the Annual Membership Meeting in this issue.) Mr. Stone seconded. The motion carried unanimously.

Following the vote, Miss Edmonds read to the Board the resolution submitted by Tom Kirk, Earlham College; Mary Jo Lynch, University of Massachusetts; Sister Elizabeth O’Connor, Manhattanville College; and Hannelore B. Rader, Eastern Michigan University, requesting the establishment of a new committee.

Whereas, in recent years academic librarians have become increasingly interested in developing programs and materials which teach students how to use library resources and

Whereas, there is no adequate group within the present structure of ACRL which will assist academic librarians at all levels in developing effective programs and materials to accomplish this end Therefore be it resolved, that ACRL appoint an Ad Hoc Committee on Bibliographic Instruction which will:

1. Consider the possibility of establishing a clearinghouse for information on instructional programs currently in operation.
2. Explore methods of evaluating existing programs and materials.
3. Investigate the need for research into problems connected with instructional programs.

Mr. Stone called attention to the fact that the Junior College Libraries Section already has a Bibliography Committee and suggested that if the new committee is authorized, the two work together as much as possible. Miss Edmonds thereupon moved that the Ad Hoc Committee on Bibliographic Instruction be established; Mr. Barclay seconded, and the measure was unanimously APPROVED.

Miss Buist, Chairman of the Subject Specialists Section, then presented a petition to establish an Anthropology Subsection. She advised that a petition to establish the subsection had contained the required number of signatures, that the signatures had been verified, and that the Executive Committee of the Subject Specialists Section had agreed to the request. The motion to establish the Anthropology Subsection of the Subject Specialists Section was then made by Miss Buist, seconded, and approved with no dissenting votes. Miss Edmonds declared the Anthropology Subsection formally established.

Mr. Jacobs, responding to Miss Edmonds’ call for any further business, inquired as to the Board’s intent with respect to goals, structure, and finance. Miss Edmonds indicated that a definite course of action was yet undetermined.

In her parting remarks, Miss Edmonds reiterated that everyone had to be more alert and aware of what was happening in the organization and reaffirmed the need for a much greater degree of interchange of ideas and views. Miss Abell, one of the visitors, asked to be permitted to make a statement at this time. She wanted the Board to know that she, along with many of her friends, felt that the ACRL membership meeting should be scheduled much earlier in the conference week so that the members would have time to make ACRL concerns known to the ALA Councilors. Many of the younger members, particularly, were most interested in ACRL affairs, but not knowing what was to be brought before the membership meeting precluded their trying to influence votes on the ALA Council. The general consensus was that Miss Abell had presented an excellent idea and one which should be considered.

There being no further business, Miss Edmonds adjourned the meeting.

EXHIBIT III

Report of the ACRL Task Force on Goals, Structure and Finance

Goals

Note:The following goals are listed at random without implying any intended priorities. the goal of the Association of College and Research Librarians, a federated organization of the American Library Association, is to advance librarianship in our institutions of higher learning and in our scholarly research centers by improving the opportunities for professional development among academic and research librarians and thereby to effect continuing improvement in the libraries they serve. Specific objectives of the Association are:

To define standards for professional qualifications and responsibilities and to promote their acceptance and application.

To stimulate and encourage the formulation of standards, programs, policy and legislation designed to improve access and services for the entire community of academic and research library users.

To achieve full faculty status for all academic librarians as well as equivalent privileges pertaining thereto, including salary privileges. Either unilaterally or in cooperation with other academic groups, ACRL will provide support and protection for academic librarians as well as means of arbitration, mediation and inquiry.

To promote and defend intellectual freedom in the academic and research library context.

To recruit well-qualified persons to academic and research library service.

To Foster the continuing development of education for academic and research library service. Developing and maintaining close liaison with schools of librarianship is essential to promoting this goal.

To promote research and experimentation in academic and research’ library practice. to establish closer ties between academic and research librarians and the scholarly universe of which they are a part through developing close working relationships with national and international academic organizations and learned societies.

To foster cooperative programs of acquisition, bibliographic control and service involving academic and research libraries.

To prepare, finance, and disseminate the publication of statistical reports and other information of value to academic and research librarians, e.g., bibliographic aids, technical manuals, reference tools, directories, and scholarly monographs.

ACRL Structure

In making the following recommendations we have attempted to take into account the democratization which has been requested. To achieve this goal, the authority to initiate and direct the policies and activities of the Association should reside with its elected officers. We advocate a strong President, Executive Committee, and Board of Directors. The longest elected officers could serve on the Executive Committee or the Board of Directors would be four years with one-fourth retiring from each group each year. This then would give continuity and stability to the government of the Association but still would allow the membership a complete change of elected officers every four years. In keeping with the goal of democratization the Executive Director would be appointed by, would report to, and would serve at the pleasure of the Association officers. His role would be primarily that of coordinating Association activities.

Name

American Association of College and Research Librarians

Membership

Open to individuals holding professional appointments in college and research libraries.

President and Vice-President (President-Elect)

Elected from and by the membership each for a one-year term, the Vice-President shall be the President-Elect and shall succeed to the presidency at the end of the President’s term. They shall perform duties pertaining to their respective offices and such other duties as approved by the Executive Committee or the Board of Directors.

Executive Committee

The Executive Committee shall be composed of the President, Vice-President, and the immediate past president. It shall act for the Board of Directors in the administration of established policies and programs.

Executive Director

The Executive Director shall be appointed by the Board of Directors and shall serve at the pleasure of the Board. He shall be in charge of the Association headquarters and its personnel and shall be responsible for carrying out such supportive functions as may be required by the President and the Board of Directors. He shall serve as secretary to the Executive Committee and the Board of Directors.

Board of Directors

The Board of Directors shall be the governing body of the Association. The Board shall be composed of members of the Executive Committee, a certain number of Directors elected at-large, and the Chairmen and Vice-Chairmen of the sections. The Vice-Chairmen will be members without vote. The term of all Directors at-large would be for four years, only onefourth of this group would be elected each year.

Committees, Sections, and Task Forces

Committees, sections, and task forces shall be established by the Board of Directors as needed.

EXHIBIT IV

On April 27, 1970, J. Michael McConnell, a member of ACRL, was offered an appointment as the head of the Cataloging Division at the St. Paul Campus of the University of Minnesota by the university librarian, Dr. Ralph H. Hopp.

On July 10, 1970, the Board of Regents denied approval of this appointment, overriding the approval of the university librarian.

The Library Staff Association, in support of the university librarian, passed the following resolution on June 11, 1970.

Whereas, the Library Staff Association endorses the principles and implications of individual freedom, individuals have the right to expect that value judgments shall be made only on their ability to perform the duties outlined for the positions to which they have been appointed.

They met again July 9, 1970, and reiterated the above resolution and also passed the following.

Employment procedures for professional library staff have, up to this time, rested upon the library’s, the university’s and the Board of Regent’s trust in Dr. Hopp s judgment regarding a candidate’s qualifications to perform the duties attending the position to which he is being recommended for appointment. The Library Assembly fully endorses Dr. Hopp’s ability to make the right decision in judging the qualifications of persons he recommends to the Board of Regents.

On March 11, 1971, the Senate of the University of Minnesota approved the following resolution of the Senate Library Committee.

The University Senate, University of Minnesota, regrets the action of the Board of Regents in refusing to appoint James Michael McConnell as an instructor in the University Library. This action, contrary to the expressed policy of the University of Minnesota in the past, violates the principle that academic staff should be hired, retained, and promoted on the strength of academic and professional criteria and not on the basis of personal characteristics irrelevant to the fundamental mission of the University. As elected representatives of the Faculty and student body, we ask assurance from the Regents that this principle will be honored in the future.

In light of the Regents’ violation of the principle stated above, we urge that the Regents withdraw their appeal and employ Mr. McConnell as ordered by the court.

Whereas, The Committee on Academic Status of the ACRL in its work to improve the quality of academic librarianship reaffirms the principle “that academic staff should be hired, retained, and promoted on the strength of academic and professional criteria and not on the basis of personal characteristics irrelevant to the fundamental mission of the University,” therefore

Be it resolved that the ACRL deplores this action of the Board of Regents of the University of Minnesota, and urges the Board to rescind its action and employ Mr. McConnell and that this resolution be forwarded to the appropriate authorities.

EXHIBIT V

Appointments

President-Elect.Upon notification of election to the position of vice-president/presidentelect (usually in early June) the individual will first give consideration to the selection of a committee on Appointments and Nominations. Possible appointees should be contacted during the Annual Conference which immediately follows the election. Formal invitations to serve on the committee will be sent from headquarters, and appointees will be asked to reply by forwarding copies of an acceptance form to the president-elect and the ACRL executive secretary. A list of individuals to be invited to serve on the Committee on Appointments and Nominations must be sent to the executive secretary by the president-elect no later than July 15. It is essential that this deadline be met in order to provide adequate time for those invited to respond, to include the full committee roster in the ALA Organizational Information issue, and to allow the committee to begin consideration of ACRL appointments.

The ACRL Committee on Appointments and Nominations will immediately begin to assemble a list of individuals to be recommended for appointment to the' ACRL Committees. They will also recommend candidates for ACRL offices for the election in the spring of the president-elect’s term as president. Final consideration should take place at the Midwinter Meeting following appointment of the committee, and recommendations should be made to the president-elect at that time. The committee will receive lists of replacements necessary on the various committees, names of individuals who have served as officers or committee members in the past, and other information. Upon submission of, their recommendations the committee will have fulfilled its charge unless circumstances require additional appointees or candidates for office within the next year.

As soon as possible after receipt of the recommendations from this committee, the presidentelect should select those individuals he wishes to serve on ACRL committees during his term in office This information should be sent no later than March 1 to the executive secretary who will then send out invitations to serve.

Chairmen-Elect.Sections and subsections are required to have Nominations Committees (see procedures on Nominations), and the chairman-elect of the section or subsection is encouraged to also use this committee as an advisory committee on appointments. As such a committee it would function similarly to the AĆRL Committee on Appointments and Nominations (see above), forwarding all recommendations for section or subsection committee appointments to the chairman-elect at the end of the Midwinter Meeting following its appointment. Chairmen-elect should contact those individuals they wish to have serve on their section or subsection standing committees, obtain their consent, and forward their names to headquarters with copies of the correspondence no later than May 1.

Nominations

The ACRL Committee on Appointments and Nominations, designated by the presidentelect soon after notification of his election (see procedures on appointments), will begin consideration of candidates for the positions of ACRL president-elect and American Library Association Councilors immediately following its appointment. Headquarters will inform the committee of the number of candidates for Council to be nominated by ACRL. Final deliberations should take place at the Midwinter Meeting. The chairman of the committee will contact those individuals to be nominated for office. The names of individuals nominated, along with their letters of consent, must be forwarded to the ACRL Executive Secretary by April 1.

Section and subsection chairmen-elect, upon notification of election (usually in early June), will immediately give consideration to the selection of a Nominations Committee. Possible appointees should be contacted during the Annual Conference which follows the election. A list of the individuals who will serve on the Nominations Committee, along with letters of consent, must be sent to headquarters by the chairmen-elect no later than August 1. It is essential that this deadline be met in order to include the full committee roster in the ALA Organizational Information issue and to allow the committee to begin consideration of candidates for office in the spring of the chairman-elect’s term as chairman.

The section and subsection nominating committees will be informed of the positions to be contested. Final consideration of candidates will take place at the Midwinter Meeting. The chairman of the Nominations Committee will contact those individuals to be nominated and will forward the names of the candidates, along with their letters of consent, to the executive secretary no later than April 1. Upon submission of these names the committee will have fulfilled its charge unless circumstances require additional candidates for office within the next year.

ACRL Calendar

July 15	Deadline for submission of names of ACRL Appointments and Nominations Committee members by president-elect.
August 1	Deadline for submission of names of Nominations Committee members by section and subsection chairmen-elect.
	Minutes of all Annual Conference meetings due.
December I	Interim progress report due from all chairmen.
	Deadline for submission of budget requests by all chairmen.
January	Midwinter meetings.
	Highlights of all midwinter meetings due before the end of conference.
	ACRL Appointments and Nominations Committee’s recommendations on appointments due for submission to president-elect.
	Applications for the J. Morris Jones—World Book Encyclopedia—ALA Goals Award due before the end of conference.
February 1	Deadline for submission of candidates nominated by petition for election in the spring.
March 1	Minutes of all midwinter meetings due.
	Deadline for submission of ACRL appointments by president-elect.
April 1	Deadline for submission of all slates of candidates for office (and letters of consent) for the elections to be held in the spring of the following year.
May 1	Deadline for submission of appointments by section and subsection chairmenelect.
	Annual reports due from all chairmen.
May 15	President’s annual report to council and membership due.
June	Notification of election results early in the month.
	Annual Conference
	Highlights of all meetings due before end of conference. ■ ■

The Dual-Media Concept

… saves money and space without sacrificing research effectiveness

As viewed by Evan Farber, author of Classified List of Periodicals for the College Library (Faxon, 1957 & 1970) and a member of the Institute’s Editorial Advisory Board,

“Because The Congressional Record and its predecessors contain so much information about the activities of Congress, including the votes and near-verbatim reporting of debates, it is an essential resource for all courses relating to American government and should, therefore, be available in every academic library. On the other hand, its very comprehensiveness not only creates a space problem for most libraries, but also results in disproportionately high acquisitions costs for new libraries attempting to acquire complete backfile runs.

Microfilm offers a partial solution in that it is less expensive initially and saves valuable shelf space. One of the major obstacles to its acceptance however, has been the fact that students and other researchers find that searching for references in microform indexes is inconvenient, time consuming, and ultimately discouraging to effective research.

“Having the Proceedings of Congress available then, in the Dual-Media Edition, with the proceedings and appendices on microfilm and the Sessional Indexes and Histories of Bills and Resolutions in printed form (the Record is almost useless without its Indexes), means that libraries can now offer the wealth of this resource plus the convenience of the Indexes in book format, yet use a minimum of space and money.”

THE UNITED STATES HISTORICAL DOCUMENTS INSTITUTE

… has been founded in Washington, D.C. to republish complete collections of basic out-of-print historical reference materials in “Dual-Media Editions.” Initially, special emphasis will be placed on those basic serials which have been recommended for new or expanding academic libraries which are building collections in the fields of U.S. History and Government. These “Dual-Media Editions” will be reproduced in optimum combinations of microfilm and book formats to provide maximum gains in serials reference capacity at minimum cost.

EDITORIAL ADVISORY BOARD

This distinguished and representative Editorial Advisory Board has been organized to assist the Institute in its planning and program evaluation activities.

Sen. Warren Magnuson	(D-Wash.); Chmn., Sen. Commerce Comm.; Chmn., Subcomm. Labor-HEW Appropriations
Sen. Mark Hatfield	(R-Ore.J; Sen. Comm, on interior & Insular Affairs; Sen. Comm, on Aeronautical & Space Sciences
Rep. John Brademas	(D-lnd.); House Education & Labor Comm.; Jt. Comm, on the Libr. of Cong.
Rep. Fred Schwengel	(R-lowa); Member, Jt. Comm, on the Libr. of Cong.; Comm, on House Administration
Evan Ira Farber	Libn., Earlham Col.; 1968- 69 Dir., Col. Libr. Sec., ACRL
Dr. E. M. Kirkpatrick	Exec. Dir., American Political Science Assn., Washington, D.C.
Dr. Wm. Goetzmann	Dir., Dept. of Amer. Studies, Univ. of Texas; Pulitzer Prize, History (1967)
Roger Smith	Exec. Editor, Publishers' Weekly, New York, N.Y.

Dual-media sets for each Congress and Session are also available, as are single microfilm reels and index volumes. Send for our detailed catalog listing individual units. All items are sold “on approval” and may be returned for credit within sixty days after delivery.

USE THIS CONVENIENT PRICE SCHEDULE AS YOUR ORDER FORM FOR DUAL-MEDIA SETS.