I’d been involved in “research” during my project years, without a job description, much supervision or standard evaluation, and a lot more politics (that was the bad part). When I wanted to return to the bosom of the library, there were no obvious jobs for me to fill, and because of my seniority and (relatively) high salary I was not an attractive bet for some of those who might have been inclined to want to use my skills and experience. It didn’t help that I had a reputation for independence and impatience with the badly prepared … The powers that be were prepared to end my appointment early and force me into early retirement as a result, regardless of my more than 25 years of excellent service with the institution.

In any case, mostly because I have good skills and a willingness to reinvent myself, I worked out a deal which retains my academic appointment (academic non-faculty, five years at a time, renewable) but does not require the institution to pay me, I’m basically raising my own salary with grants and consulting. It’s a good move for me, and like most of the best professional changes I’ve made, pretty involuntary.

But the whole business reminded me how vulnerable we are, regardless of our great skills and good service. This is not to say that I’m advocating tenure for librarians–I’m not sure tenure is such a great deal either, but the “employment model” in place in most libraries is not necessarily going to fit well with the enormous changes we see coming. In my case I feel like I’m bringing the “research model” more common in academic departments into the library. They’re not particularly comfortable with it yet, but I’m determined to make it work. If for no other reason that it will pave the way for others …

Meredith Farkas of Information Wants To Be Free has a great essay on one of the great conundrums of academic…

But the question is, is it really safe for our kids to be dependent on internet research?

I lean your way….I was a faculty member with tenure and had many colleagues who argued vociferously and passionately that this was just and right–that we would be mere drudges in the academic mills otherwise. I never ever got that sense myself. I would hope that our profession’s regard and standing on a campus would be connected to demonstrated ability and performance not a contract designation.

The one area I personally found faculty status helpful was for participation in governance. I was active in the Faculty Association and held office, something I would not have been able to do without faculty status–and would not be of interest to many, of course.

And a little voice deep inside me has wondered, now and then, if academic librarians who make a great to-do about faculty status are worried, secretly, that only legislated status proves worth, because for way too many librarians it’s so hard to demonstrate otherwise.

We have a published literature which is large and largely undistinguished. The demand for publications from editors exceeds the supply of interesting material.

For a community that is interested in the reform of scholarly communication this is not good.

I’m hoping this trend continues.

I used to want to be an academic librarian, but was deterred by two events: the realization that I would have to publish in some positions, and an attitude among academic-centered library students in my program that special/corporate librarians were effectively doing their clients homework. I was so taken aback that I thought perhaps I should attack librarianship from a different angle.

I think the politics of academia would have annoyed me as well.