UCI Librarian Denounces Bias Report as One-Sided

Responding to a highly critical report on alleged bias in the UC Irvine library, the library’s chief administrator Tuesday said he disagreed with most of the study’s conclusions but urged his staff to view it as “a catalyst” to improve conditions in the department.

Calvin Boyer, head librarian at UCI, devoted much of his annual “State of the Library” address to the report issued last Friday. The study, prepared after a five-month investigation by a special faculty committee, criticized Boyer for his “dubious” commitment to affirmative action and questioned his leadership capabilities.

“It is my fervent hope that this document is a catalyst to bring about change in the quickest order, with the longest lasting effect we can ensure,” Boyer said in his speech to the UCI Library Staff Assn. “ . . . If my vision is clouded, I offer you an opportunity to adjust the glasses.”

Boyer, whose speech was generally well-received by staff members in attendance at the Campus Village Community Center, did not discuss specifics of the report. But in a letter to Academic Senate Chairman Howard Lenhoff, who ordered the committee investigation, Boyer lashed out at the report and charged that press coverage slanted the committee’s findings.

“Given the tenor of the report, its earlier appearance in the press, and the power of the press to affect adversely the whole library as witnessed by the effects of articles last year, any semblance of due process is beyond recovery,” Boyer wrote.

Boyer was referring to media reports last year of alleged discrimination in the library. The reports led to the faculty committee investigation.

In the letter, Boyer questioned the committee’s findings and charged that some of its conclusions “are directly contradicted by the facts.” He said alleged mistreatment of minority librarians and patrons were isolated incidents.

“It is commonly held throughout the library that there has been a very limited number of incidents offensive to any user regardless of ethnic heritage (out of tens of thousands of interactions which take place each year) and that public service to everyone is on par with the best of university libraries,” Boyer wrote.

Boyer added that the panel’s finding that his commitment to affirmative action is “at best dubious” was “either an error of fact or interpretation.”

“During the last four years, 37.5% of our permanent appointees have been minority librarians; 70.8% have been minority or women librarians,” he wrote. “ Dubious is, it seems to us, a dubious adjective to describe what we understand to be among the best record on campus for any UCI school.”

He added that “replicable statistical analyses of data (will) directly refute contentions” that minority librarians were promoted at a slower rate than their white counterparts.

Myron Simon, an English professor who chaired the committee, said he was not sent a copy of Boyer’s response. However, he said he would be willing to discuss Boyer’s rebuttal in an open forum.

“We have lots of evidence (of affirmative action violations) that we never even used,” Simon said. “If he wishes to insist his records are better, we’d be glad to respond.”

After the speech, Boyer reiterated his assertion that the committee’s report was one-sided but added that he is pleased that the study is likely to spur change in library procedures. “There is always room for improvement,” he said.