Faculty culture and bibliographic instruction: an exploratory analysis - The Library and Undergraduate Education

Library Trends, Fall, 1995 by Larry Hardesty

Several elements of faculty culture result from this mixed tradition. There is the strongly held belief in the faculty culture that teaching is an art, not a science, and one is an effective teacher because one knows his or her subject matter" (Bergquist, 1992, p. 26). Often, particularly when undergraduate education is viewed as preparation for graduate school, teaching is viewed primarily as informational--that is, communicating to students certain knowledge and techniques dominant in the discipline (Freedman et al., 1979, p. 20). A feature of faculty culture is that faculty are valued for what they know rather than what they can help other people learn (Group for Human Development in Higher Education, 1974, p. 14).

Astin (1985) described a paradox of faculty culture in that faculty members can view teaching as so straightforward that it requires no special training, and yet is so complex and idiosyncratic that mere training could never meet its extraordinary demands (Group for Human Development in Higher Education, 1974, p. 14). In contrast to this view held among the collegial culture, bibliographic instruction librarians more typically identify with the values identified with what Bergquist has described as the "managerial culture." Those who identify with the managerial culture tend to believe "educational outcomes can be clearly specified and the criteria for judging performance can be identified and employed" (Bergquist, 1992, p. 58). In faculty culture, emphasis is more on developing another researcher in a discipline than imparting "specific knowledge, skills, and attitudes in students so that they might become successful and responsible citizens" (Bergquist, 1992, p. 5). Not only is teaching not frequently discussed, it is also not rigorously evaluated. The individual nature of research as a dominant theme in faculty culture is carried over to teaching. Bergquist (1992) observed:

Many faculty members in the collegial culture would take great offense

at being asked, let alone required, to accept an observing colleague

in their classrooms. It would be considered an invasion of

the essential privacy required by the teaching-learning act. Ironically,

even though classroom teaching is certainly a public event, it

is considered an intimate interchange between faculty member and

student. This interchange might be profoundly disrupted if observed

and judged by another faculty member... The major faculty prerogative,

called academic freedom, precludes both observation of

classroom performance and review of ongoing research and scholarship.

(p. 42)

Professional Autonomy and Academic Freedom

One of the most prevalent canons of faculty culture is that the faculty member has complete professional autonomy. The faculty member is in charge of his or her classroom. More than thirty years ago, Millett (1962) wrote:

The faculty member determines for himself course content and

scope, instructional procedure, and expectations of student achievement.

The outline of subject matter to be covered in the course, the