Over the last 19 years, I've had nine or ten reassignment leaves, ranging from two to four weeks per project. Those projects included time to work on "Find That Tune (Neal-Schuman), "Magazines for Libraries" (Bowker), "Serials for Libraries (Neal-Schuman), an article on Jack Kerouac for the "Facts on File Bibliography of U.S Literature," articles for the "Dictionary of American Biography" (Scribners) and the Scribner's Encyclopedia of American Lives." I'm not sure about whether or not I was ever turned down by the appointments committee. If so, it was because there may not have been enough leaves to go around at the time. Brooklyn is generally alloted five leaves and the appointments committee gives untenured people or those applying for promotion priority, as it should. I remember at least once, however, when the deparment discussed requesting an additional reassignment leave from the pool and I believe it was granted. So long as there are leaves left in the pool (which there usually are), and the department and the college approve the project, I imagine the Central Office can exercise some flexibility on how the leaves are allocated to each college. At Brooklyn, there's a tendency to try and spread the leaves around. Because of this, two week leaves have probably been more common than four week leaves. It also has been difficult sometimes to award people consecutive days, though the department has usually tried to accomodate the research needs of the applicants. I certainly appreciate the time that reassignment leaves have given me for my research projects. They've been particularly valuable in terms of beginning my research or finishing up a project. I've also used them to do research in libraries and special collections that are only open during hours that I'm usually working. I urge everyone to take advantage of these leaves. If anyone has any questions or would like any advice, I'd be happy to speak or email with you privately.
Two years ago I applied for professional re-assignment here at Bronx CC and received a "yea" from all parties involved in this process. My research is still on-going, but it was nice to be able to actually get the opportunity to indulge in serious research. My re-assignment was a scant two weeks during the month of July 97. I could not ask for more because of staffing. I am the only full-time librarian in my area, and during this period our campus was financially in the red. Or is it black? There was no money to hire a part-time Adjunct for the daytime. This re-assignment was not grant funded and I did not explore that possibility at the time. It was a fascinating two-week excursion even though some of the campuses visited were short of people due to vacations etc.. What was somewhat disconcerting was the "don't bother me attitude of some areas I visited even though I am considered "faculty" and a "librarian." I realize now that I should have had more time, but in CUNY, mentoring is not done across the board. Some of us are finding out pertinent info to our professional development, second hand, instead of from those of us who have been through the process already. Indeed, these same colleagues are still publishing, receiving promotions and moving up the CUNY ladder. They have earned these and rightfully are entitled to the rewards of their labor and efforts. It is not only a personal reward but also shows CUNY detractors that WE are about "education" and want the best for our students and campus communities. More information, guidance, and constructive criticism should be raining down from those who have been there, done that and are continuing down the path. Re-assignment is a good thing. But how do you get to do this if the information is not forthcoming from us who have done it? Most, if not all of us have to go through the P&B process. Why is it that only when this process is set into motion that questions like re-assignment, publications, professional development come out in the open? I was shocked when speaking with a colleague to find out that they had no insight into the realm of professional development via writing for pub., 2nd master's etc.. When asked if their colleagues spoke on such things with them, the answer was NO. Therein lies the problem. It is one thing to say that it is our respective responsibilities to research these topics for economic survival, it is quite another when SOME and not ALL are informed for the benefit of promotions, professional development and further learning.
Here is my belated answer:
> Have you ever applied for professional reassignment?
Yes: 1988, 1989, 1990, 1992,
> Was your application approved or denied? If it was approved, how long was your reassignment?
Maybe with one additional application denied, reassignments were approved; length: four weeks
> How did you use your leave?
I took sometimes one day a week, during the summer or winter intersessions used longer time periods, and worked on the given project. I found the reassignment leave unsatisfactory. I was Science Librarian until halfway through the last one. I did get relief from Reference Desk duty (8 hrs per week) but I was still responsible for all my other duties. So in actual time all I gained was 32 hrs, which isn't even equivalent to one week. Having a floating librarian step in and help library faculty fully during reassignment leave would be an improvement.
>Was grant money involved in your reassignment leave?
Yes, in 1991/92 I was granted a PSC-CUNY Research Award to work on a research topic together with a colleague at Queens College. I was the PI. We hired a research assistant who helped with data entry, but our time was limited and not paid for. I stopped applying for professional reassignment after becoming Head Librarian at the Health Professions Library. Since then the work at HPL has eaten up a great deal of my time, and with a professional staff of two sharing duties which could keep three librarians busy, I found it too difficult to take days off during the academic year. In addition to my experience at the Hunter Main Campus, this is why I recommend changing the way professional reassignment is currently supported.
Over the past ten years I have applied for two reassignment leaves. They were two years apart and both occurred before I was granted tenure. Each of the reassignments was for four weeks. I had a specific project underway that I needed to move toward completion. I was told when I applied for reassignment that I would have the best chance of getting one if I promised a publication as a product.
I used the four weeks mostly during school vacations and breaks but some of it was taken as one day a week during the academic school year. I used the reassignment time to both research and to write. Rather than catching some time to write during work or on weekends I wrote at home all morning and spent the afternoon researching in a library. The reassignment days gave me spans of time to think before writing and to rewrite.
My second reassignment involved co-authoring a book for which I also had a PSC/CUNY grant of $4000. The grant money paid for a research assistant to make copies in libraries and photocopying costs. We also purchased a low-level notebook computer which I used for word processing as I worked in libraries creating a bibliography for the book and gathering author addresses. The remainer of the grant paid for DIALOG database searches, stationary supplies, printer toner, postage for mailings to authors and transportation costs.
I also highly recommend reassignment leaves especially for writing for publication and professional development. Our chief librarian has encouraged us to use them for training in new technology. However, the amount of paper work I had to do for the PSC/CUNY Grant would make me reluctant to apply for one again.
