Following up on the academic librarian bloggership survey

Just for kicks, I decided to answer the list of questions provided in the Hendricks article I recently read. The survey was looking into whether academic libraries or their universities view blogging as an academic endeavor good enough for tenure and promotion.

I will include the questions, then provide my answers (in italics) to the best of my ability. If nothing else, this is mostly a reflection exercise.

• What is your title? My current title is Reference/Outreach Librarian. 
• Is this a staff, faculty, or administrative position? This is a staff position. However, in my campus, librarians have this odd position. We are not seen as faculty (because we are staff), but we do have a voting seat in the faculty senate. I do not know all the history behind getting that concession (it happened before my time), but I do know the faculty gave it reluctantly. I am ready to admit asking me about this may not be the best idea. I personally do not think librarians should be faculty, but there are a couple of colleagues here who think differently, and one who at least views this as a way to springboard into getting a scale (Librarian I, II, III or similar) implemented. Not something I necessarily like, but it is what it is. On the other hand, the rest of the staff do not see us necessarily as one of them because we are academics. Officially, this is a staff position. 
• If you are faculty or administrative, what is your rank? N/A.
• Is this a tenure-track position? No. 
• What is your age? Generation X. If this was the anonymous survey with the confidentiality, I'd give the age. But I don't think I need to give that out publicly. 
• How many years have you held this position? Three years (entering my 4th year now). 
• How many years have you been at your current institution? The same three years as the previous question. 
• Does your institution expect you to publish scholarly articles and/or engage in scholarly activities? No expectation to publish scholarly articles. To be honest, I don't think the administration cares one way or the other. As for scholarly activities, encouragement of that is lukewarm at best. It falls under "it is nice if you do it, but it is not required." Besides, given the pretty bad budget cuts we've had, which include hefty travel restrictions, the administration really cannot expect us to do much of anything in terms of things like conferences, and they pretty much know it. And while the administration says they would consider paying for something if it is directly relevant to your work (so, attending say a conference that is not LIS stuff to present, which I have done for my subject areas, would be totally out of the question), the guilt trip they put you through for asking may well not be worth the hassle of asking. So overall, no expectation in regards to publishing scholarly articles or engaging in scholarly activities. If it were not for my personal efforts to keep up, write and reflect as I do now, I probably would not do much of anything scholarly.
• Please list which library or (library-related) blogs you regularly read. I have a big list of library and library-related blogs in my feed reader. Some I regularly read include the following: The Society for Librarians Who Say Mofo, Off the Mark, Shelf-Check, Zenformation Professional, Annoyed Librarian, Academic Librarian, Walt at Random (plus the "usual suspects" most academic librarians usually mention like Free Range Librarian, Information Wants to be Free, Tame the Web, Librarian in Black, Librarian.net, ACRLog, Kept-Up Librarian) and a bunch of others I am too tired to type out now.
• Of those blogs, do you consider any of them to be scholarly? I would say Academic Librarian by Wayne Bivens-Tatum can be considered scholarly both in terms of the content and style. Off the Mark by Mark Lindner when he is discussing some LIS-related topic can be very scholarly as he is very thoughtful and critical in his writing (I make the distinction because, like many bloggers, he does blog about other things on his blog, a distinction I think may be part of why the issue is raised, but that is another digression). Walt at Random by Walt Crawford (certainly his extensive work on librarian blogging should qualify). ACRLog, but that is sort of a given. The others in the "usual suspects" list can be academic, but they are more either tools for keeping up or opinion/essay blogs. Tame the Web can be academic, but the minute Michael Stephens starts to nitpick about things like library signage he pretty much loses credibility (it seems mostly a petty gesture to me). 
• If you consider the above blogs to be scholarly (equal to an article published in a peer-reviewed journal), please describe why. If I have to go by that definition, equal to a peer-reviewed article, Academic Librarian would likely be the only one rising to the top in a consistent fashion. The others basically go in and out of being in that level. Stephens for example will feature guest bloggers who certainly write good academic level work (by that definition). So does ACRLog (then again, ACRLog is a collaborative blog). But delivering it every single time, not likely. Of course, this is just the humble opinion of a guy with three readers. 
• If you do not consider the above blogs to be scholarly (equal to an article published in a peer-reviewed journal, please describe why. First, see my previous answer. Second, for blogs like The Society of Librarians Who Say Mofo or the Annoyed Librarian, I think taking a look should answer that question. Do you really need me to type it out? Though I will say the AL can argue and reason with the best of them on a good day (even if this irks the detractors. You have to give credit where it is due. Besides, I am sure a lot of her readers, assuming AL is a female, read it just as a form of venting). However, that AL can do that does not make her scholarly by the definition provided. 
• At your institution, do performance review committees believe publishing a blog is weighted the same as publishing an article in a peer-reviewed journal? I do not know about the faculty, but my guess (based on what I hear from them) would be no. As for me, I can pretty safely say the answer is no. I will add the clarification that my blogging is another thing the administration does not care a lot about. My director is aware that I maintain this blog. I think maybe one other colleague reads it (he may become the "fourth reader" if he keeps it up). That is pretty much it. 
• Do you publish a blog? Yes (I am doing it right now). For the record, I have three blogs. The Gypsy Librarian (this one) is my professional blog. The Itinerant Librarian is my personal blog. Alchemical Thoughts is my scratch pad/commonplace book blog (I honestly don't expect anyone to follow that one, but if they do, no biggie. It's odds and ends and a much more experimental blog). In addition, I do maintain and publish our library's official blog, The Patriot Spot. I am the library's primary blogger. 
• If you do publish a blog, do you believe it should count as scholarship? At this moment in time, no. If I put a lot more effort into The Gypsy Librarian, not to mention actually had some time to do some research and substantial writing, maybe I could argue it was scholarly. But that day is not anytime soon, and the administration does not care anyways, so there is no serious incentive. I would argue more that the blog would be a form of service, infinitesimal as it may be, to the librarian community. My other two blogs are personal, so the answer would be no, though The Itinerant Librarian at times could be like the blog of an informed citizen and librarian (librarian in the sense of being a community member). 
• If you do not publish a blog, why not? N/A.
• Any other thoughts about blogs and scholarship? What? The previous thoughts were not enough? That could be another post on another day.