Presentation at annual national meeting of the Music Library Association, San Diego, CA, March 201

Cleveland, Susannah

Puente, Mark A.

Tsou, Judy

English

Bowling Green State University: ScholarWorks@BGSU

Bowling Green State University ScholarWorks@BGSU University Libraries Faculty Publications University Libraries 3-2010 Theme and Variation: The Survey of MLA Personnel Characteristics Mark A. Puente Susannah Cleveland Bowling Green State University, clevels@bgsu.edu Judy Tsou Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.bgsu.edu/ul_pub  Part of the Library and Information Science Commons Repository Citation Puente, Mark A.; Cleveland, Susannah; and Tsou, Judy, "Theme and Variation: The Survey of MLA Personnel Characteristics" (2010). University Libraries Faculty Publications. 49. https://scholarworks.bgsu.edu/ul_pub/49 This Presentation is brought to you for free and open access by the University Libraries at ScholarWorks@BGSU. It has been accepted for inclusion in University Libraries Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@BGSU. In	1997,	MLA’s	Working	Group	Surveying	Music	Library	Personnel	Characteristics,	conducted	a	survey	of	MLA	personnel	to	get	a	picture	of	our	profession	They	set	out	with	the	following	objectives:to	create	a	"statistical	portrait"	of	the	organization	in	the	late	1990sto	test	whether	or	not	certain	commonly	held	assumptions	about	members’	activities	and	about	the	organization	were	indeed	true,	and,	finally,to	see	if	there	were	any	reasons	some	individuals	let	their	memberships	lapse,	or	did	not	join	MLA	even	though	their	interests	would	seem	to	coincide	with	those	of	members.	The	report,	still	available	from	the	MLA	Clearinghouse,	pointed	out	some	interesting	facts	about	the	profession	and	its	composition.In	2007,	Mark	Puente	and	I	started	wondering	if,	in	the	past	decade,	there	had	been	any	significant	changes	to	the	data	gathered	in	that	first	study	or	to	the	conclusions	reached.		Additionally,	we	were	specifically	curious	about	whether	the	diversity	of	our	organization	– that	is,	the	inclusion	of	traditionally	underrepresented	groups	–had	seen	any	significant	changes	in	the	last	decade.1David	Lesniaski,	Tim	Cherubini,	Charles	Coldwell,	Richard	Griscom,	Pat	Fisken,	Michelle	Koth,	Renee	McBride,	and	Cindy	Richardson,	“A	Profile	of	the	Music	Library	Association	Membership:		Report	of	the	Working	Group	Surveying	Music	Library	Personnel	Characteristics,”	under	“Introduction,”	http://library.music.indiana.edu/tech_s/mla/person/notesarticle.htm (accessed	24	February	2010).1One	of	our	first	aims	in	the	new	iteration	of	the	survey	was	to	compare	our	data	to	the	data	in	the	1997	survey	to	determine	if	there	had	been	any	significant	change.The	sampling	in	the	previous	survey	focused	on	heavily	on	MLA	membership	by	sending	surveys	directly	to	a	random	sample	of	300	MLA	members	and	80	non-members.Because	of	our	sampling	method,	it	seemed	likely	that	we	would	have	a	larger	group	of	non-MLA	members	amongst	our	respondents.		Out	of	the	401	surveys	completed	(2	declined	to	give	informed	consent),	301	self-identified	as	MLA	national	members.		55	people	explicitly	said	that	they	were	not	members,	while	45	people	skipped	the	question.		For	the	sake	of	this	presentation	and	the	comparison	to	the	1997	study,	we	will	be	focusing	on	the	sub-group	of	self-identified	MLA	members,	since	that	was	the	target	of	the	last	data	set	and	of	most	immediate	interest	to	the	MLA	audience.2In	reporting	the	data	from	the	survey,	we	will	mostly	be	giving	percentages	for	the	purposes	of	clarity	and	ease	of	comparison,	but	you	will	see	more	of	the	actual	numbers	and	raw	data	later.		We’ll	go	through	many	of	these	numbers	and	charts	quickly	now,	but	we	will	make	the	presentation	available	for	you	to	view	after	the	conference	as	well	as	compiling	a	report	with	more	thorough	assessment	later	this	year.34We	are,	as	you	would	expect,	a	highly	educated	group.		The	301	member	respondents	hold,	in	total	494	music	degrees,	along	with	5	diplomas	and	5	incomplete	PhDs.		An	additional	65	people	completed	coursework	in	music	at	the	bachelor ’s	or	master ’s	level	without	completing	a	degree	in	music.5We	won’t	go	over	the	specific	distribution	of	majors	here,	but	this	is	a	graphic	representation	where	the	size	of	the	words	indicates	each	major ’s	relative	proportion	amongst	our	membership.	(though	I	should	note	that	this	is	not	strict;	I	had	to	decrease	the	numbers	of	musicology	and	instrumental	performance	majors	for	any	of	the	rest	to	be	legible	at	all.		Those	tiny	dots	are	music	technology,	music	administration,	and	church	music.6Members	collectively	report	holding	278	professional	degrees	or	certifications	in	library	science	and/or	archives.		Most	of	these	– 271	– are	ALA-accredited	degrees	in	library	science	either	with	or	without	a	music	specialization.	 	Our	members	boast	an	additional	64	degrees	at	the	bachelor ’s	or	master ’s	level	in	subjects	other	than	music	or	library	science.(if	you’re	curious,	this	comes	to	a	total	of	643	degrees	divided	amongst	301	people,	though	some	people	skipped	some	parts	of	that	section)78Amongst	our	members,	almost	91%	work	in	a	library	and/or	archive.		Four	percent	are	students,	and	almost	3	percent	are	retired.		One	percent	of	our	members	are	currently	unemployed.		The	remaining	members	are	divided	between	“Other	music	industry,”	“The	library	commercial	sector,”	and	other	positions,	such	as	music	professors,	composers,	and	musical	directors.		This	overall	data	reveals	a	marked	change	from	1997	when	83%	of	members	reported	working	in	a	library	and/or	archive,	and	13%	were	retired,	though	part	of	this	difference	might	result	from	the	fact	that	 in	that	survey,	respondents	were	able	to	choose	multiple	options	– and	18%	did	-- while	in	the	current	version,	we	asked	them	to	select	only	one.9Just	over	88%	our	members	who	are	librarians	work	in	academic	libraries,	almost	7%	work	in	public	libraries,	1.5%	work	in	archives	or	special	collections	not	affiliated	with	an	academic	institution	or	public	library,	and	2.2%	work	in	governmental	libraries.		Less	than	one	percent	work	in	school	libraries	with	an	identical	figure	for	orchestra	libraries.		The	distribution	for	non-members	is	almost	an	exact	copy	of	that	from	1997,	with	no	additions	to	school	or	orchestra	libraries,	but	several	more	academic,	public,	and	government	librarians	in	the	intervening	years.Of	those	working	in	academic	libraries,	approximately	50%	work	in	doctoral-degree-granting	institutions,	almost	29%	work	in	institutions	with	master ’s	and/or	post-baccalaureate	programs,	and	almost	22%	work	in	undergraduate-only	institutions.		This	seems	to	be	more	of	a	shift	towards	doctoral	institutions	than	in	the	earlier	study.		Slightly	fewer	work	in	state-supported	institutions	– just	over	53%	compared	with	60%	earlier	– with	just	over	40%	in	private	institutions	and	15%	in	conservatory	libraries.		The	majority	of	academic	 librarians	–almost	62%	-- work	at	institutions	with	more	than	10,000	students.1011Since	the	last	study,	the	percentage	of	music	librarians	with	faculty	status	has	risen	to	almost	42%	from	33%.	[note	the	three	categories	that	go	into	“faculty”:	 tenured	faculty,	tenure-track	faculty,	and	permanent	or	continuing	faculty,	purple,	blue,	and	orange]		The	largest	number	of	our	members	working	in	academic	 libraries	– just	over	44%	-- are	considered	professional	staff.		Almost	4.5%	report	being	classified	staff,	although	an	additional	4	respondents	noted	that	they	were	“paraprofessional	staff”	in	the	“Other”	category;	combining	these	two	takes	that	total	to	almost	6%.Of	the	members	who	answered	the	question	about	how	many	hours	are	assigned	to	his	or	her	position	– 29	skipped	it	– 81%	indicated	that	their	position	was	full	time,	that	is	37	hours	or	more	per	week.	 	This	figure	is	down	8%	from	the	corresponding	figure	in	1997.	12Of	those	who	are	currently	employed	full	time,	1.9%	had	salary	ranges	in	the	$20,000-$30,000	range,	3.3%	were	in	the	over	$100,000	range.		Others	were	distributed	in	between,	with	the	largest	group,	23.2%	in	the	$50,000-$60,000	range.	131997	salaries,	for	comparison14Our	overall	rate	of	unionization	is	almost	identical	to	that	ten	years	ago	– almost	22%	compared	to	21%	in	1997.		19%	of	academic	librarians	are	unionized	– compared	with	20%	before	– while	the	rate	of	unionization	amongst	our	public	librarian	members	has	climbed	to	72%	from	60%.Salaries	for	union	members	do	trend	higher	than	do	those	for	non-union	members,	as	you	can	see	on	this	chart.	 	Note	that	the	salary	ranges	are	listed	from	high	to	low,	descending.		The	largest	portion	of	union	members,	21.9%,	have	a	salary	in	the	range	of	$60,000-$70,000	while	non-union	members	are	situated	most	solidly	in	the	area	of	$40,000-$50,000.		This	illustration	includes	all	workers,	not	just	full	time	workers.15We	did	encounter	a	significant	correlation	between	education	and	salary	levels.	 	The	vertical	bars	and	dashes	on	this	chart	represent	where	members	at	each	education	level	tended	to	fall	in	terms	of	salary	ranges,	which	are	listed	on	the	left-hand	side,	with	the	highest	salaries	at	the	top.		Notice	that	members	with	only	an	MLS	tend	to	top	out	salary-wise	right	around	the	lowest	salaries	of	those	who	have	a	second	master ’s	degree	in	addition	to	an	MLS.		The	chart	does	not	include	every	individual	member,	but	the	largest	groupings	at	each	level.	 		The	open	circles	here	represent	outliers	who	do	not	fall	within	the	groupings.1617As	we	mentioned	early	on,	301	of	the	401	people	who	completed	surveys	indicated	that	they	were	current	members	of	MLA.		18The	largest	group	of	our	members	– 28.9%	have	been	members	of	MLA	between	1	and	5	years,	but	as	you	can	see	here,	almost	45%	of	our	membership	fall	into	the	5-20	year	range.19People	attributed	several	different	factors	to	encouraging	them	to	join	MLA.		Most	important	was	the	contact	with	other	members	of	the	profession,	followed	closely	by	conference	attendance.	 	Amongst	reasons	listed	in	“Other,”	several	people	listed	playing	with	the	big	band,	the	usefulness	of	MLA-L,	access	 to	continuing	education,	assistance	with	music	cataloging,	and	the	closeness	of	friendships	formed.20People	who	had	not	joined	MLA	or	who	had	let	their	membership	lapse	at	any	time	gave	several	explanations.		Foremost	among	explicit	reasons	is	the	cost	of	joining,	followed	by	change	in	employment,	then	the	sense	that	MLA’s	offerings	are	not	relevant	to	specific	professional	goals.	The	“Other”	section	included	several	comments	about	the	time	and	expense	of	involvement,	several	that	indicated	that	some	people	had	only	ever	been	members	to	get	access	to	Notes but	now	had	institutional	access,	 while	one	other	felt	that	MLA	was	“like	a	boys	club”	and	was	not	inclusive	to	those	who	were	not	insiders	already.	21Our	members	are	also	active	in	many	different	organizations.		The	highest	level	of	involvement	– 194	of	our	301	member	respondents	– also	pay	dues	to	state	or	regional	library	associations,	which	include	state	or	regional	MLA	chapters.222324Of	the	301	respondents,	183	(61.6%)	were	female	while	114	(38.4%)	were	male;	 4	MLA	members	skipped	this	question.		This	represents	a	shift	from	the	1997	study	in	which	55%	of	members	were	female	and	45%	were	male.25Our	current	membership	is	concentrated	most	heavily	in	the	age	groups	of	41-50	years	old	(almost	26%	of	membership)	and	51-60	(just	over	27.1%	of	membership).		We	used	different	age	ranges	than	in	the	previous	study,	but	the	distribution	was	similar,	with	the	two	largest	groups	being	35-44	(25%)	and	45-54	(34%).26In	our	study,	95%	of	MLA	members	indicated	that	they	were	of	“White”	origin;	in	the	1997,	the	corresponding	category,	“European/Ango	American	heritage”	accounted	for	93%	of	respondents.		While	this	initial	figure	shows	an	increase	in	this	particular	demographic,	the	remaining	5%	did	shows	slightly	greater	diversity:		3.4%	of	respondents	selected	Latino,	1%	Native	American,	including	Alaskan,	1.3%	Asian,	.7%	African	/African	American,	.3%	Pacific	Islanders	or	Native	Hawaiians,	and	1.7%	other.		3	people	skipped	this	question.		27In	contrast,	no	respondents	selected	African/African	American	or	Pacific	Islander	in	the	last	study.		Keeping	in	mind,	however,	the	sizes	of	samples	in	both	studies,	the	increases	in	these	two	particular	groups	only	account	for	three	people.2829On	the	question	of	sexual	preference,	each	category	increased	over	the	1997	numbers,	indicating	a	lower	no-answer	rate	- almost	6%	rather	than	the	10%	rate	in	the	last	study.		81.7%	of	our	respondents	indicated	their	sexual	preference/orientation	as	heterosexual,	compared	with	78%	in	1997.		14.8%	identified	as	lesbian/gay,	compared	with	10%	earlier.		3.5%	in	our	study	identified	as	bisexual,	compared	with	2%	in	the	last	study.	(current	data	is	on	the	left	in	this	chart	with	1997	data	on	the	right)The	number	of	members	who	work	in	the	United	States	rose	to	96%	from	93%,	while	members	who	work	in	Canada	rose	to	over	3%	from	1%.		No	other	country	was	selected	 as	the	place	of	work,	but	one	person	did	skip	this	question.30For	the	members	working	n	the	U.S.	who	indicated	in	which	state	they	worked,	the	geographic	distribution	was	not	significantly	different	than	in	the	last	study	with	35%	in	the	Northeast,	27%	in	the	Midwest,	25%	in	the	West/Southwest,	and	14%	in	the	South.	3132National	population	racial/ethnic	breakdown33Projected	national	population	racial/ethnic	breakdown34Projected	national	population	racial/ethnic	breakdown35National	Center	for	Education	Statistics	racial/ethnic	breakdown36National	Center	for	Education	Statistics	racial/ethnic	breakdown	projection3738

Theme and Variation: The Survey of MLA Personnel Characteristics

https://scholarworks.bgsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1056&context=ul_pub

Theme and Variation: The Survey of MLA Personnel Characteristics

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Bowling Green State University: ScholarWorks@BGSU