Notes from a Simple Librarian: Article Note: A Bit More on Librarian Sabbaticals

This article was cited in the previous article I read about factors that contribute to librarian turnover. Sabbaticals were discussed a bit in that article. I was able to get a hold of this article, so I figured I would read it too. I will disclose up front that librarians in my small college do qualify for sabbaticals, though there are issues with that I will mention as I comment on this article.

This article looks at academic librarian participation in sabbaticals. The research was based mainly on a survey sent to library directors that included some open-ended questions; answers to those open-ended questions are discussed in the article. A significant part of the argument for librarians taking sabbatical if they are able is that the experience can provide some respite and refreshing for the librarians. To be honest, for me at least, besides not being able to take a sabbatical (a full one that is), a sabbatical would not be the respite and/or break from the daily grind writes like the author make it out to be. It would just be taking time off to do more work, different work, but still a lot of work, then write reports about it when I get back while catching up on the work I was not able to do while I was gone on said sabbatical. That is not less stress. That sounds like more stress, and I can do without that.

Some takeaways from the article:

A 2001 study by Gaskell and Morril, which this article's author relies on quite a bit, found that a bit over half of the academic institutions the researchers surveyed offered sabbatical to academic librarians; however, only the most "avid" librarians applied for the programs (153).

I can't imagine why more librarians would not apply. I will disclose also that prior to my current job, I never had sabbaticals as an option, so personally I fail to see the big deal.

Author points out that literature related to sabbaticals in academia is small, even smaller when it deals with academic librarians. This literature tends to be either personal narratives or descriptive and informative review articles. In other words, the kind of LIS articles that may get written because someone needs to get tenure, but are not persuasive to administrators. In fact, the author mentions this: "Regrettably, this kind of writing is simply not likely to convince those college administrators, 'who really have not plans or expectations for the library except the hope that it will stay withing the allocated budget and that the faculty and the students...will not complain too strenuously about it'" (154).

Then there are administrators who would love to cut the library budget even more (or entirely if they could get away with it), but that is another story.

The author discloses: "It is now time to acknowledge that this author is one of the fortunate few within the library profession to currently be enjoying a year-long sabbatical. Yet, my own experience also demonstrates that such 'acceptance into full faculty collegiality is not generally extended'" (154).

Must be nice and duh! Further, the author describes their institution: "Our leadership is strong and the staff highly skilled and service-oriented. We work with an exceptional teaching faculty, a reasonably engaged student body and the librarians at my institution look forward to lengthy, fulfilling careers" (154). To be honest, the author's description of their institution does have echoes of Lake Wobegon.
Author goes on to write after that disclosure about a colleague who had a sabbatical project rejected, a project that was related to the library and its work (I guess it was not deemed academic enough). Not exactly a supportive administration there, but not surprising. For me, that is another reason I do not bother applying for sabbatical: I honestly do not think based on local conditions that I can get the upper ups to approve anything I would care enough about to work on during a sabbatical.

Adding to my comment above, this finding from the article is not encouraging: "The following respondent's comment was representative, 'there is no specific prohibition against it, but it is unclear if a request for a sabbatical would be approved by the faculty committee or college administration.' Other participants noted that sabbatical leaves could be provided 'on (the) whim' or 'at the discretion' of administrative personnel outside of the library" (155).
Key question from the article author: "...librarians do suffer job-dissatisfaction and burnout. Shouldn't we be making a more determined effort to get out a bit more?" (154).

Yes, and it's called taking a vacation, not a sabbatical.

Barely 50% of respondents said that sabbatical offerings from librarians were equivalent to what "real" faculty get. The article goes on to state that "a number of respondents report that librarians at their institutions receive sabbaticals that are significantly shorter in duration than those of their teaching faculty colleagues" (158). This also brings up an issue of equity.

I can assure you we would be one of those places where the sabbatical offering for librarians is not equivalent to what the "real" faculty get. Our situation here is very much like situations reported in the article where "another person who also noted that at his/her institution librarian leaves needed to 'coincide with summer, whereas faculty can go for half or full years. . .'" (158).