Advanced Degrees in Addition to the MLS: A Survey of Recent Hiring Practices
in Canadian Academic Libraries
Mark Jordan
mark@targetinform.com
November 1995
Abstract
A survey of Canadian academic library administrators on the topic of advanced degrees in addition to the MLS revealed that even though advertisements for 15.4% of the positions in question stipulate possession of an additional advanced degree, 46.1% of the positions were filled by holders of advanced degrees. Factors motivating employers to recruit holders of additional advanced degrees include institutional policy and the need for librarians with a subject specialty; factors motivating them not to recruit holders of additional advanced degrees include institutional policy and the need for librarians who may possess specific skills considered more valuable than an additional advanced degree.
Introduction
One of the most prevalent debates over the education of academic librarians is whether they should possess advanced academic qualifications besides the master's-level professional degree in library and information science. A representative example of this debate is the dialog between Jean-Pierre V.M. Herubel and William G. Jones which appeared in 1991 in College and Research Libraries News. Herubel argues that lack of an advanced subject degree in addition to the professional library degree may "make it very hard" for academic librarians to be perceived by teaching faculty "as making a significant contribution [to the academic community] and impossible to be percieved as an equal partner in the educational enterprise" (Herubel 1991, 473), and also identifies other reasons why academic librarians should also hold advanced subject degrees, such as increased sensitivity to the "sociology of knowledge" within a discipline, enhanced collection development skills, and greater ability to "interpret the collection to students and scholars" (Herubel 1991, 473). Jones does not refute the importance of librarians' understanding the intellectual norms of disciplines nor the importance of librarians' being perceived favorably by teaching faculty, but contends that "there is little evidence that librarians, well-trained or poorly trained, have ever been part of the 'scholarly research process' or that scholars have relied on them for more than the most basic assistance in the conduct of their inquiries" (Jones 1991, 585). Possession of an additional advanced degree, according to Jones, is no guarantee that academic librarians will exhibit the "[i]ntelligence, discrimination, perseverance, and knowledge of bibliography and bibliographic principles on which libraries are organized," qualities he sees as central to the profession (Jones 1991, 585). Extended treatments of specific points raised by Herubel and Jones also exist, such as Michael A. Keller's "Late Awakenings: Recruiting Subject Specialists to Librarianship and Collection Development" (Keller 1994). Also adding to the debate is a small body of survey research identifying a perceptible increase in the number of advertisements for academic library positions which explicitly mention an advanced degree in addition to the professional library degree (Olsgaard and Olsgaard 1981; Wells 1982; Swisher, Smith, and Boyer 1983; Aufderhaar 1991).
The purpose of this research project is to determine the demand in Canadian academic libraries for applicants who hold advanced degrees in addition to the MLS or its equivalent, and to identify specific reasons why some advertisements for academic library positions state that an additional advanced degree is either recommended or required for the positions in question, and why others do not. The four research questions that guided the project are
- How frequently do employers in Canadian academic libraries actively recruit holders of additional advanced degrees; that is, how frequently do they stipulate in position advertisements that an additional advanced degree is either recommended or required for the position in question?
- How frequently do these employers hire librarians who hold additional advanced degrees, regardless of whether the position advertisements stipulate such degrees?
- What are some of the specific reasons motivating employers to stipulate that an additional advanced degree is either recommended or required for the positions in question? and
- What are some of the specific reasons motivating employers not to stipulate that an additional advanced degree is either recommended or required for the positions in question?
A mailed survey was used to gather data. The approach used to explore the first two of these questions is quantitative, whereas the approach used to explore the last two is qualitative in that it examines survey respondents' replies to open-ended questions. Both approaches are exploratory in nature and aim to generate base-line data in response to the research questions. In addition to serving as the basis for further research, this study's findings may contribute to the codification of guidelines and policies at a variety of levels regarding additional advanced degrees among academic librarians, they may help employers identify specific desired skills and personal qualities in candidates for academic library positions, and they may help potential applicants for academic library positions decide whether pursuing an additional advanced degree is worth the time and effort.
Previous Research
A survey on this topic in the context of Canadian academic libraries has until now never been conducted, although several relevant research projects have been undertaken in the U.S. In 1978, Pamela Palmer and Donna Gambill published the results of a survey of forty academic library administrators from the American Southeast (Palmer and Gambill 1978). Even though their survey generated some qualitative data, much of the quantitative data focussed on the opportunity for librarians to persue an additional graduate degree while employed in professional positions, a topic not explored in the present study. In 1979, Sheila Creth and Faith Harders surveyed the forty-five members of the ACRL Discussion Group of Personnel Officers to determine the types of background, education, and library experience these administrators felt applicants for entry-level positions in research libraries should have; twenty-four of the thirty respondents who returned questionnaires reported that a second master's degree was at least preferred (Creth and Harders 1981). In 1981, Lawrence Auld, Kathleen M. Heim, and Jerome Miller surveyed the directors of 118 randomly selected public, academic, special, and school libraries to determine the feasibility of offering an "extended master's degree program" at the Graduate School of Library and Information Science at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, which would emphasize management training and computer-related library functions (Auld, Heim, and Miller 1981). Their survey is relevant to the present study because many of the questions they asked deal with the demand for librarians who hold two master's degrees (i.e., an MLS and an additional master's degree) and because some of the questions deal with hypothetical differences (for example in salary or opportunities for promotion) between holders of two master's degrees and holders of the proposed extended degree. The questionnaire also generated some qualitative data relevant to the present study.
The most recent survey research on the hiring of academic librarians who hold advanced degrees in addition to the MLS is Kathleen E. Aufderhaar's "Educational Requirements Beyond the MLS for Academic Librarians in 1990" (Aufderhaar 1991). Aufderhaar analyzed 231 position advertisements published in 1990 in American Libraries and distributed a questionnaire to each of the addressees named in the advertisements. Among her findings is that the number of academic library positions advertised with graduate degree requirements in addition to the MLS was greater in 1990 than in previous years (Aufderhaar 1991, 23). Aufderhaar's research served as a general model for the present study.
Population Definition and Data Gathering
The study population for this research project consisted of those people named as addressees in all advertisements for Canadian academic library positions which appeared in Feliciter and the CAUT Bulletin between May 1992 and May 1994 inclusive. "Academic" here refers to libraries that are part of any post-secondary institution. For reasons of economy, only English-language or bilingual institutions were included in the population. Also, position advertisements for chief or assistant-chief librarian, or strictly managerial positions such as personnel librarians, were not included. A total of fifty-five advertisements met the above criteria. Although eligible for inclusion in the study population, no non-degree-granting post-secondary institutions advertised from May 1992 to May 1994 in Feliciter or the CAUT Bulletin. Therefore, all of the libraries represented by the study population serve universities or degree-granting colleges. Since some institutions posted multiple advertisements during this period, and since each institution named only one person as the addressee in all the advertisements that it posted, the number of respondents within the study population is smaller than the number of advertisements. In total, twenty-seven addressees were named in the fifty-five advertisements. Over half (63%) were chief librarians at their respective institutions; the rest included one or two each of unit or divisional heads, chairs of selection committees, vice-presidents academic, library personnel officers, and institutional human resource officers. Two of the addressees had unspecified titles.
This small study population allowed the use of a census survey design. Four library school faculty members reviewed the eight-item questionnaire and three senior academic librarians pretested it (see Appendix). In September 1994, the position advertisements were analyzed and the questionnaire was mailed to all twenty-seven addressees, who received one questionnaire for each advertisement in which they were named. Attached to each questionnaire was a copy of the pertinent advertisement. The questionnaire was designed to gather both quantitative and qualitative data: six of the eight items began with a closed question and then asked the respondent to elaborate freely on his or her response. One item was only closed-ended and did not elicit any elaboration, and the remaining item was only open ended. While most of the questions specifically referred to the hiring procedures for a particular position advertisement, one question elicited information on institutional hiring practices, and two others elicited the respondent's opinion. Quantitative and qualitative data-gathering techniques were used in conjunction to develop a rounded profile of the study population and to ensure useful responses to the research questions. The quantitative data derived from the returned questionnaires were tabulated using the SYSTAT statistical analysis software package, and the qualitative data were grouped into coding categories using methods suggested by Robert C. Bogdan and Sari Knopp Biklen (Bogdan and Biklen 1992, 165-72).
Results
After the initial mail-out in September and two follow-up mailings in early November and late December 1994, twenty four of the twenty-seven respondents (88.9 %) returned their questionnaires, supplying usable data for thirty-nine of the fifty-five position advertisements (70.1 %). Data scatter in the quantitative data prevented the valid use of inferential statistics, such as measures of association and tests of statistical significance.
The Demand for Additional Advanced Degrees in Canadian Academic Libraries
This survey gauged the quantitative demand for additional advanced degrees in Canadian academic libraries from two perspectives: through analysis of data supplied in the position advertisements and through analysis of data supplied by the people named in those advertisements.
Graphs 1, 2, and 3 illustrate the distribution of the variables "necessity of additional advanced degree," "level of additional advanced degree," and "relevance of additional advanced degree" as they were expressed in the position advertisements: (note 1)
Of the fifty-five advertisements in the study population, twelve (21.8 %) stipulated that an advanced degree in addition to the MLS was either recommended or required for the position in question. This percentage approximates Kathleen Aufderhaar's finding that 26.7 % of the advertisements in her comparable American study stipulated an additional advanced degree (Aufderhaar 1991, 14).
Of those twelve advertisements, eight (14.5 % of the study population) specified an additional master's-level degree, and the remaining four (7.3 %) simply specified an additional "advanced" degree or some other generic description equivalent to "advanced." None of the advertisements specified that an additional doctoral-level degree was either recommended or required for the position. Seven of the twelve (12.7 %) made no mention of the relevance of the additional advanced degree to the position in question, one (1.8 %) stated that the additional degree was to be in a "relevant" discipline, and four (7.3 %) stated that the additional degree was to be in a specifically named discipline or subject area. As Graph 1 suggests, within this study population the most typical mention of an advanced degree in addition to the MLS is that the preferred degree is at the master's level, that it is only recommended as opposed to being necessary, and that its relevance to the position in question is not explicitly mentioned in the advertisement.
Table 1 lists the type of position, level of position, type of library/division, and size of library cross tabulated with the necessity of additional degree as it is indicated in the published advertisements. (note 2) Each cell expresses the number of advertisements out of "n" that share the intersecting values. The number "n" for the four variables differs because each variable had different amounts of missing data:
| Advertised Necessity of Additional Degree | |||||
| Not Mentioned | Recommended | Necessary | Total | ||
|
Type of Position (n=50) |
Public Services | 25 (50%) | 3 (6%) | 2 (4%) | 30 (60%) |
| Tech. Services | 10 (20%) | 4 (8%) | 0 (0%) | 14 (28%) | |
| Mixed | 5 (10%) | 1 (2%) | 0 (0%) | 6 (12%) | |
| Total | 40 (80%) | 8 (16%) | 2 (4%) | 50 (100%) | |
|
Level of Position (n=47) |
Entry Level | 6 (12.8%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 6 (12.8%) |
| Gen. Librarian | 20 (42.6%) | 2 (4.3%) | 2 (4.3%) | 24 (51.1%) | |
| Unit Admin. | 10 (21.3%) | 6 (12.8%) | 1 (2.1%) | 17 (36.2%) | |
| Total | 36 (76.6%) | 8 (17%) | 3 (6.4%) | 47 (100%) | |
|
Type of Library / Division (n=55) |
General | 30 (54.6%) | 5 (9.1%) | 1 (1.8%) | 36 (65.5%) |
| Specialized | 12 (21.8%) | 3 (5.5%) | 0 (0%) | 15 (27.3%) | |
| Highly Specialized | 1 (1.8%) | 1 (1.8%) | 2 (3.6%) | 4 (7.3%) | |
| Total | 43 (78.2%) | 9 (16.4%) | 3 (5.5%) | 55 (100%) | |
|
Size of Library (n=55) |
Small | 8 (14.6%) | 1 (1.8%) | 2 (3.6%) | 11 (20%) |
| Medium | 5 (9.1%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 5 (9.1%) | |
| Large | 30 (54.6%) | 8 (14.6%) | 1 (1.8%) | 39 (71%) | |
| Total | 43 (78.2%) | 9 (16.4%) | 3 (5.5%) | 55 (100%) | |
Table 1: Cross Tabulations of Type of Position, Level of Position, Type of Library/Division, and Size of Library with Advertised Necessity of Additional Degree (Percentages apply to each respective "n" and are rounded)
These cross tabulations indicate that 1) advertisements for positions predominantly involving the administration of the library unit, division, or branch often stipulate an advanced degree in addition to the MLS; 2) no advertisements for entry-level positions stipulate an additional advanced degree; and 3) advertisments for general and for specialized or highly specialized libraries or divisions stipulate additional advanced degrees with approximately the same frequency.
Data supplied by the people named in the advertisements reveals that considerably more applicants who hold advanced degrees in addition to the MLS were hired than advertised for. That is, even if an advertisement did not mention that an additional advanced degree was recommended or required for the position, in many cases an applicant with an additional advanced degree was hired to fill that position. Table 2 is a cross tabulation of the variables "additional degree held by hired applicant" (note 3) and "advertised necessity of additional advanced degree" for the thirty-nine positions for which respondents returned questionnaires. Each cell expresses the number of positions, out of thirty nine, that share the intersecting values:
| Advertised Necessity of Additional Degree | |||||
| Not Mentioned | Recommended | Necessary | Total | ||
|
Additional Advanced Degree Held |
No | 19 (48.7%) | 1 (2.6%) | 0 (0%) | 20 (51.3%) |
| Yes | 13 (33.3%) | 2 (5.1%) | 3 (7.7%) | 18 (46.1%) | |
| Position not filled | 1 (2.6%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 1 (2.6%) | |
| Total | 33 (84.6%) | 3 (7.7%) | 3 (7.7%) | 39 (100%) | |
Table 2: Cross Tabulation of Additional Degree Held by Hired Applicant and Advertised Necessity of Additional Degree (n=39)
Table 2 indicates that even though advertisements for only six of the thirty-nine positions for which data are available (15.4 %) mention an additional advanced degree, eighteen of the thirty-nine positions (46.1 %) were in fact filled by holders of additional advanced degrees. Furthermore, the advertisements for thirteen of these eighteen positions (33.3 % of the positions for which data are available) did not mention an additional advanced degree at all. Table 2 also indicates that five of the six positions (83.3 %) that called for an advanced degrees in addition to the MLS were filled by holders of such degrees. This percentage is considerably higher than Kathleen Aufderharr's finding that 58.3 % of the positions in her study population which stipulated an additional advanced degree were filled by holders of such degrees (Aufderhaar 1991, 22). However, the difference in the sizes of the study populations and in the number of returned questionnaires (39 for the present study, 151 for Aufderhaar's) cast some doubt on the validity of the comparison.
Table 3 contains cross-tabulations for the same variables as Table 1, but only for the eighteen positions filled by holders of advanced degrees in addition to the MLS. As in Table 1, the number "n" for the four variables differs because each variable had different amounts of missing data:
| Advertised Necessity of Additional Degree | |||||
| Not Mentioned | Recommended | Necessary | Total | ||
|
Type of Position (n=14) |
Public Services | 6 (42.9%) | 0 (0%) | 2 (14.3%) | 8 (57.1%) |
| Tech. Services | 4 (28.6%) | 1 (7.1%) | 0 (0%) | 5 (35.8%) | |
| Mixed | 1 (7.1%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 1 (7.1%) | |
| Total | 11 (78.6%) | 1 (7.1%) | 2 (14.3%) | 14 (100%) | |
|
Level of Position (n=15) |
Entry Level | 3 (20%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 3 (20%) |
| Gen. Librarian | 6 (40%) | 0 (0%) | 2 (13.3%) | 8 (53.3%) | |
| Unit Admin. | 2 (13.3%) | 1 (6.7%) | 1 (6.7%) | 4 (26.7%) | |
| Total | 11 (73.3%) | 1 (6.7%) | 3 (20%) | 15 (100%) | |
|
Type of Library / Division (n=18) |
General | 8 (44.4%) | 1 (5.6%) | 1 (5.6%) | 10 (55.6%) |
| Specialized | 5 (27.8%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 5 (27.8%) | |
| Highly Specialized | 0 (0%) | 1 (5.6%) | 2 (11.1%) | 3 (16.7%) | |
| Total | 13 (72.2%) | 2 (11.1%) | 3 (16.7%) | 18 (100%) | |
|
Size of Library (n=18) |
Small | 2 (11.1%) | 1 (5.6%) | 2 (11.1%) | 5 (27.8%) |
| Medium | 5 (27.8%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 5 (27.8%) | |
| Large | 6 (33.3%) | 1 (5.6%) | 1 (5.6%) | 8 (44.4%) | |
| Total | 13 (72.2%) | 2 (11.1%) | 3 (16.7%) | 18 (100%) | |
Table 3: Cross Tabulations of Type of Position, Level of Position, Type of Library/Division, and Size of Library with Advertised Necessity of Additional Degree, for Positions Filled by Holders of Advanced Degrees in Addition to the MLS (Percentages apply to each respective "n" and are rounded)
Comparing the percentages listed in the corresponding cells of Tables 1 and 3 reveals that, for each variable, the number of librarians hired who hold additional advanced degrees (expressed in Table 3) is not disproportionate to the entire study population as described in the published advertisements (expressed in Table 1). The only notable exception is that none of the five advertisements for positions in medium-sized libraries (representing three different institutions) stipulate an additional advanced degree, yet all five positions were filled by holders of such degrees.
The data derived from the published advertisements and the data supplied by the respondents indicate that, at least among the institutions who responded to the survey, the number of people hired with advanced degrees in addition to the MLS substantially exceeds the number of positions whose advertisements mention an additional advanced degree. Even though the advertisements for many of the positions in the study population did not stipulate an additional advanced degree, the positions were quite often filled by applicants who did hold advanced degrees in addition to the MLS.
Factors Motivating Employers to Recruit Holders of Additional Advanced Degrees
Most respondents who stipulated in the published advertisements that an advanced degree in addition to the MLS was either recommended or required for the positions in question elaborated on their decisions.
All three respondents who replied "yes" to the question "Is it common practice at your institution to state in all advertisements that possession of an advanced degree in addition to the MLS is either required or recommended for the position?" cited institutional policy as the reason why it is common practice. When asked if they agree with this practice, all three indicated that they did agree, one saying that the practice was a "political reality" and another simply saying that at her institution librarians were members of the faculty union; the third said "Given that the library is in an academic setting, librarians will have a broader academic outlook" if they possess advanced degrees in addition to the MLS. A respondent who replied "no" to the first question echoed this last opinion by saying that "I don't disagree with the practice In large institutions there could be an over-abundance of staff with backgrounds such as literature There is often a need for diversity...."
Seven respondents identified specific reasons why they stipulated additional advanced degrees in certain position advertisements. (Even though Table 2 indicates a combined total of six positions under the "recommended" and "necessary" columns, a seventh respondent, who did not explicitly mention an additional advanced degree in the position advertisement, did recruit applicants with research experience in the primary discipline served by his library.) Not surprisingly, a theme all seven expressed is that for the positions in question, some subject expertise was required. In one respondent's words, "A subject master's was expected to contribute expertise to the assigned responsibilities, broadening the base of knowledge presently available." Another typical response was the more general "This is a very specialized library and a good background in [the subject] is necessary." One respondent specified that the "Advanced degree [would be] particularly relevant for reference service and collection development." Other reasons identified by these seven respondents for either recommending or requiring an additional advanced degree include faculty acceptance, lecture/teaching potential, and, in one case, "Given that this was a senior appointment," possessing an additional advanced degree "would also permit a higher rank/salary to be assigned...."
When asked if any member of the selection committee specifically recommended to the rest of the committee that applicants for the position should possess a graduate professional degree such as an MBA or an MSW in addition to the MLS, three of the seven respondents replied "yes." All three were from highly specialized libraries serving patrons studying and/or researching in the same discipline (which will remain unidentified to protect the respondents' anonymity). These three respondents cited many of the reasons for requiring an additional advanced degree mentioned above, but they did not clearly identify any other reasons. However, their responses regarding advanced professional degrees suggest that highly specialized institutions often actively recruit librarians with correspondingly specialized post-graduate educations. This apparent trend is also corroborated by the fact that the advertisements for two of these three positions indicated that an additional advanced degree was necessary as opposed to only recommended, and that the applicants hired to fill all three of these positions did hold the required professional degrees.
No one replied "yes" when asked if any member of the selection committee specifically recommended to the rest of the committee that applicants for the position should possess a PhD in addition to the MLS. Only one, who was also one of the three who replied "yes" to the question about an additional professional degree, elaborated at all: "We were not expecting that level of education in [the discipline in question] actually we were somewhat surprised at the number of applicants with advanced degrees," presumably meaning master's degrees in that particular discipline.
In summary, the dominant factors motivating the surveyed employers in Canadian academic libraries to recruit holders of advanced degrees in addition to the MLS or its equivalent include the desire to hire librarians with some subject expertise or a potentially "broader" academic outlook, and institutional policy.
Factors Motivating Employers Not to Recruit Holders of Additional Advanced Degrees
Those respondents who did not mention in their advertisements an advanced degree in addition to the MLS elaborated in considerable detail on their decisions.
In these cases, the most cited reason not to ask for an additional advanced degree was that the position in question had no specific disciplinary focus. Six of the seven respondents who gave this reason did not elaborate on why no disciplinary focus is sufficient reason not to ask for an additional advanced degree; the only respondent who did elaborate said that "We had no subject-specific requirements for this job so advanced degree not discussed. Our collective agreement only specifies ('allows') asking for undergrad degree and library degree." Even though this respondent is clearly conscious of restraints imposed by her institution's collective agreement, the phrase "so advanced degree not discussed" suggests that had the position required some subject expertise, the institution may have advertised for a holder of an additional advanced degree anyway.
Four respondents said that they preferred an "all-rounder" to a specialist; in the words of one,
This is a small, undergraduate institution emphasizing liberal arts and traditional programs in psychology, sociology, business administration, and computer science. There are only a few (3) professional librarians on staff a good all-rounder is our preference, not a specialist.
Another said
As a small institution with few librarians (7) our needs are more for individuals who can operate comfortably in any subject rather than in a specialized area. Individuals must be able to select, assist in and recommend materials in...arts, humanities, social sciences, and the sciences. In larger institutions where librarians can concentrate in one of the areas, I can see the greater degree of specialization and advanced degrees being useful.
Interestingly, both of these respondents state that the size of their institutions is a factor in their decisions. Implicit in the first statement and explicit in the second is an awareness of the potential need for subject specialists in larger libraries. Auld, Heim, and Miller also report that one of their respondents said "Since we have only eight professional librarians we need generalists not specialists" (Auld, Heim, and Miller 1981, 241).
Several respondents valued certain types of experience and knowledge as much as or more than possession of an additional advanced degree. One respondent said that "We felt that there could be candidates with the kind of experience that would be as valuable as a specific [additional advanced] degree." Another reported that, for a specific entry-level position, the selection committee wanted "someone 'fresh' from library school...who was familiar with OPACs and automation because that was our major undertaking that year." This prioritizing of experience or specialized knowledge over possession of an additional advanced degree is expressed in detail in the following response:
If we were hiring a librarian for a position which was primarily reference or collection development, or a combination of the two, we would prefer a candidate with an additional master's degree, and would so advertise.
For the posting enclosed with your questionnaire, we were seeking a librarian with relevant experience, specifically interlibrary loan and supervisory experience. In cases where a specific kind of experience is critical, I think a candidate with this experience would take priority over a candidate with an additional degree but less experience.
In my opinion, academic libraries are now often seeking librarians with training and experience in computer technology and management more often than they're looking for people with master's degrees in the "old" subjects like history and chemistry.
Several respondents singled out knowledge of electronic information resources and public service experience as highly desirable, one respondent adding that applicants without these skills are at a "real disadvantage."
Two respondents said that a candidate's personal qualities could be more important than additional educational qualifications. One said that
I want the BEST person for the job usually high in the list [are] 1) interpersonal skills; 2) analytical skills; 3) highly motivated; 4) able to handle stress and large workload; 5) potential to develop the library and him/herself A really good librarian will independently read and learn about a subject area. A second master's is not an "indicator" that the person has qualities 1-5.
and another that
When I have the opportunity to recruit a librarian the qualities I look for are 1) a reasonable human being, e.g., a person who is not overly intense, who does exhibit flexibility and curiosity; 2) sense of humor, someone who can find the lighter side of situations and who can laugh at [himself or herself]. With an MLS, the rest they can learn and become very expert.
"The rest" at the end of the second comment presumably refers to any knowledge needed to perform technical or public-service tasks.
Another recurring reason for not stipulating an additional advanced degree in position advertisements can be labeled "prudent advertising": if in their best interest, libraries may not advertise for candidates with additional advanced degrees because they want to attract a large number of applicants and because they want to allow themselves greater freedom in selecting the successful applicant. As one respondent explained,
We felt that there was no reason to eliminate a wide range of good candidates on...paper qualifications. However, [by] not specifying [that an additional advanced degree was necessary] we were not precluded from selecting a candidate who possessed an additional degree, if that person were the best candidate for the position.
Another said that
A second master's could be used to break a tie. Of course there is never a tie. We did not want to have to take a double master's candidate with poorer interpersonal skills or less potential for developing "librarianship skills."
These individual's responses reveal that some institutions are very careful and precise about how they describe the minimal educational requirements for professional academic library positions because they do not want to exclude otherwise qualified applicants. Two other findings of this survey support this concern among employers in Canadian academic libraries, regardless of whether they actively recruit holders of advanced degrees in addition to the MLS. First, the relatively large number of positions whose advertisements did not stipulate an additional advanced degree but which were filled by holders of additional advanced degrees suggests that the practice of prudent advertising as described here may be more frequent than the comments cited above indicate. Perhaps some employers did not actively recruit holders of additional advanced degrees because they did not want to preclude otherwise qualified applicants; apparently, however, many of these same employers nontheless selected a holder of an additional advanced degree, as Table 2 indicates. Second, in those advertisements that did stipulate an additional advanced degree, a noticable presence of open-ended language, expressed in Graph 1 by the attributes "recommended," "advanced" and "no explicit mention," suggests that even employers who actively recruit holders of additional advanced degrees are often reluctant to prematurely narrow the pool of qualified applicants for a given position. "Recommended" and "advanced" are taken verbatim from many of the advertisements. In addition, some advertisements use vague language to describe the level of subject specialty applicants are expected to have; typical phrasings include "competence as a scholar," "at least an undergraduate degree in...," and "substantial...education...in." Closed-ended language such as "necessary" would decrease the number of qualified applicants.
One respondent's comments offer evidence that collective agreements sometimes determine that specific academic qualifications be excluded from position advertisements. The comments, also cited earlier in this report, are in reference to both the MLS degree itself and to an additional advanced degree:
Our collective agreement specifies minimum librarian qualifications and includes BLS as eligible for employment. So we keep to "minimal" qualifications rather than enhanced. We were advised not to specify MLS as it was too exclusive, but now do it (with qualifiers)....Our collective agreement only specifies ("allows") asking for undergrad degree and library degree.
While "keeping to minimal qualifications" is the converse of the rationale offered by three of the respondents, quoted earlier, who stipulated an additional advanced degree in their advertisements, its mention by even one respondent raises the question of how many advertisements do not stipulate an additional advanced degree for similar reasons. It should be noted that the survey questionnaire did not ask whether it was policy not to stipulate an advanced degree in addition to the MLS in all position advertisements (see question 2 in the Appendix); had they been asked that question, it is possible more respondents may have mentioned this practice.
The dominant factors motivating the surveyed employers in Canadian academic libraries not to actively recruit holders of additional advanced degrees include the desire to recruit librarians who are "all-rounders" as opposed to subject specialists, the desire to recruit applicants who possess specific skills or qualities commonly considered more valuable than a subject specialty, concern that stipulating an additional advanced degree will exclude suitable applicants, and institutional policy.
Other Themes
In addition to questions pertaining to specific position advertisements, respondents were asked their opinions on whether or not they perceived a trend in Canadian academic libraries to select applicants who possess an advanced degree in addition to the MLS over applicants with only the MLS. They were also asked to offer any other comments on the topic. Many of the responses to these two questions reiterated a number of the themes that were expressed in response to the more specific questions outlined above. In addition, though, two other salient points emerged.
The first is expressed by one respondent as "A second master's MAY influence a selection committee to review the applicant more closely." This factor may help explain this study's finding that thirteen applicants with additional advanced degrees were hired to fill positions that did not require (in the published advertisements, at any rate) additional advanced degrees. However, this respondent's comment does not indicate whether being "reviewed more closely" would increase an applicant's chance of being hired, nor does it address what other experience or qualifications in addition to a second master's, if any at all, may influence employers to choose a particular candidate. Palmer and Gambill (1978, 175) and Creth and Harders (1980, 2169) also report that some respondents in their respective surveys felt that applicants who were holders of additional advanced degrees may be reviewed more closely than applicants with only an MLS; interestingly, both pairs of researchers quote their respondents as saying that possession of an additional advanced degree would "strengthen an application."
A second theme is expressed by one respondent as "Market supply at the moment is such that there is little need to look beyond the pool [of applicants] with advanced degrees." Another respondent's wording is similar: "...given the applicant pool and competition, more applicants have [advanced] degrees." This factor may also help explain the thirteen positions filled by holders of additional advanced degrees which did not advertise for additional degrees. "Market supply" and "applicant pool" are obvioulsy used here to mean the large number of qualified librarians applying for the small number of positions in Canadian academic libraries currently being advertised.
Conclusions
This study is exploratory, and attempted to generate baseline data on recent hiring practices in Canadian academic libraries regarding the demand for applicants who hold advanced degrees in addition to the MLS or its equivalent. To that end, the study found that 21.8 % of the advertisements in the study population stipulated that an advanced degree in addition to the MLS was either recommended or required. The study also found that, among the institutions who returned questionnaires, advertisements for 15.4 % of the positions stipulate educational requirements beyond the MLS, but 46.1 % of the positions were actually filled by holders of additional advanced degrees.
Factors motivating employers at the responding institutions to actively recruit holders of advanced degrees in addition to the MLS include institutional policy and the desire to recruit librarians with subject expertise. Factors motivating employers not to actively recruit holders of additional advanced degrees include institutional policy, the desire to recruit librarians who are not subject specialists but who instead can perform duties in a variety of subjects, the desire to recruit applicants with specific skills or qualities other than a subject specialty, and sensitivity to excluding otherwise qualified applicants. A number of respondents also added that possession of an additional advanced degree may attract employers' close attention and that in the competitive Canadian academic job market, employers may not need to look beyond the pool of applicants who possess additional advanced degrees.
This study is not comprehensive: it did not include Francophone institutions, nor did it include institutions advertising outside Feliciter or the CAUT Bulletin. The resulting small study population did not allow the valid use of inferential statistics to test hypotheses about the relationships between variables such as the advertised necessity of an additonal advanced degree and size of library, type and specialization of the positions, and so on.
Further research on this topic could include 1) statistical analysis of an expanded population of position advertisements to test hypotheses between, for example, the advertised necessity of additional advanced degrees and variables such as type and size of library, specialization of the positions, level of the positions, and so on; to facilitate this analysis, the study population could be expanded to include advertisements for positions at Francophone institutions, advertisements for chief librarian and purely managerial positions such as personnel librarians, and advertisements published in sources in addition to Feliciter and CAUT Bulletin; 2) a survey investigating the extent to which it is common practice at Canadian academic institutions not to stipulate in position advertisements that an advanced degree in addtion to the MLS is recommended or required; and 3) a survey investigating why so many positions that did not require an additional advanced degree (according to their published advertisements) were filled by holders of additional advanced degrees.
Appendix: Survey Questions
- Did the applicant hired to fill the position described in the attached advertisement possess an advanced degree in addition to the MLS?
- Is it common practice at your institution to state in all advertisements for professional library positions that possession of an advanced degree in addition to the MLS is either required for, or recommended for, the position? If yes, why is it common practice? If yes, do you agree with this practice? Why or why not?
- For the position described in the attached advertisement, were there any specific reasons your committee (or you yourself, if no committee was involved) decided to stipulate that possession of an advanced degree in addition to the MLS would be required or recommended? If yes, please indicate what these reasons were.
- At any time during the selection process, did any member of the selection committee specifically recommend to the rest of the committee that applicants for the position should possess a PhD in addition to the MLS? (If you alone, and not a committee, were responsible for filling the advertised position, please indicate so in the space below.) Explain the circumstances of the recommendation, if necessary.
- At any time during the selection process, did any member of the selection committee specifically recommend to the rest of the committee that applicants for the position should possess a professional degree (such as an MBA, MSW, etc.) in addition to the MLS? (If you alone, and not a committee, were responsible for filling the advertised position, please indicate so in the space below.) Explain the circumstances of the recommendation, if necessary.
- For the position described in the attached advertisement, were there any specific reasons your committee (or you yourself, if no committee was involved) decided NOT to stipulate that possession of an advanced degree in addition to the MLS would be required or recommended? If yes, please indicate what these reasons were.
- In your opinion, is there a trend in Canadian academic libraries to select applicants who possess an advanced degree in addition to the MLS over applicants with only the MLS? Please explain your opinion.
- In the space below, please add any information or comments you think are relevant to the subject of this questionnaire.
Notes
(1) "Necessity of additional advanced degree" is the expression in the published advertisement of whether an advanced degree in addition to the MLIS is necessary or recommended for the position in question; the attribute "recommeded" includes phrases from the advertisements such as "would be an asset," "priority will be given to applicants who possess...," and so on. For the variable "level of position," "entry level" refers to positions described with those words or to positions clearly described as being of the lowest professional ranking; "general librarian" refers to positions described with a range of professional rankings (such as "contract will be negotiated at the Librarian I or Librarian II level"), or if a position was clearly neither entry level nor unit administration. "Unit administration" refers to positions described with words such as "Head," "Assistant Head," or their equivalent, but not always with the sometimes vague "Coordinator." The level of many positions was coded as "missing" because the advertisements were not specific on this point. The variable "Relevance of additional advanced degree" indicates the relevance of the additional advanced degree to the position in question as it is expressed in the published advertisement. For this variable, "No explicit mention" indicates that the relevance was not mentioned at all; "in- " indicates that an additional advanced degree in a specific discipline or profession was stipulated in the advertisement; and "relevant" indicates that either that word or the words "in a related discipline" were used in the advertisement, or that neither of the first two categories applied.(Back to text)
(2) "Type of position" refers to the expression in the advertisement of the predominant duties involved in the position in question; the attributes "public service" and "technical service" are used here in their conventional senses, and "mixed" positions are those that involve roughly equal amounts of public and technical services. Many positions were coded "missing" because their advertisements did not clearly indicate the nature of the duties involved. The variable "Type of library/division" refers to the specialization of the advertising library or division/branch if the position is to be carried out in a division or branch. "General" libraries serve all or a majority of disciplines, user groups, or types of documents; "specialized" libraries are not general but serve a wide variety of disciplines, user groups, or document types, such as undergraduates, humanities/social sciences, health sciences, government publications, and so on; and "highly specialized" libraries serve a single, specific discipline, such as theology or law. The variable "Size of library" refers to the total holdings of the entire advertising library (not the specific branch or division) as indicated in the 1994-95 edition of the American Library Directory or, if data were not available in that source, as indicated in the specific institution's academic calendar. (Back to text)
(3) "Additional degree held by hired applicant" refers to the respondent's indication of whether or not the applicant hired to fill the position in question held an advanced degree in addition to the MLS, regardless of level or type of degree. (Back to text)
References
Aufderhaar, Kathleen E. 1991. Educational Requirements Beyond the MLS for Academic Libraries in 1990. Master's research paper, Kent State University. ERIC, ED 352060.
Auld, Lawrence, Kathleen M. Heim, and Jerome Miller. 1981. Market Receptivity for an Extended M.L.S. Journal of Educaiton for Librarianship 21: 235-45.
Bogdan, Robert C., and Sari Knopp Biklen. 1992. Qualitative Research for Education: An Introduction. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Creth, Sheila, and Faith Harders. 1980. Requirements for the Entry Level Librarian. Library Journal 105: 2168-69.
Herubel, Jean-Pierre V.M. 1991. To `Degree' or not to `Degree': Academic Librarians and Subject Expertise. College and Research Libraries News 52: 437.
Jones, William G. 1991. The Education of Academic Librarians: How May Degrees are Enough? College and Research Libraries News 52: 584-85.
Keller, Michael A. 1994. Late Awakenings: Recruiting Subject Specialists to Librarianship and Collection Development. In Recruiting, Educating, and Training Librarians for Collection Development, ed. Peggy Johnson and Sheila S. Intner. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 45-68.
Olsgaard, John N., and Jane Kinch Olsgaard. 1981. Post-MLS Educational Requirements for Academic Librarians. College and Research Libraries 42: 224-28.
Palmer, Pamela, and Donna Gambill. 1978. Subject Master's Degrees Among Academic Librarians in the Southeast. Southeastern Librarian 28: 172-76.
Swisher, Robert D., Peggy C. Smith, and Calvin J. Boyer. 1983. Educational Change Among ACRL Academic Librarians, 1973 and 1978. Library & Information Science Research 5: 195-205.
Wells, Mary Baier. 1982. Requirements and Benefits for Academic Librarians: 1959-1979. College and Research Libraries 43: 45-58.
Copyright 1995 Mark Jordan
Hosted by Target Library and Information Services