Instructions to Review Committees That Advise on the Appointment, Merit Increase, Promotion, Career Status Actions for Members of Librarian Series
a. The committees here referred to, either standing or ad hoc or both, are designated as review committees in what follows. Authorization for their appointment is described in APM - 360-6-b and -c.
b. The quality of the librarian series at the University of California is maintained primarily through objective and thorough review by pee and administrators of each candidate for appointment, merit increase promotion, and career status action. Responsibility for this review falls in part, upon the review committee(s). For purposes of appointment is the duty of these committees to assess the present qualifications o candidates and their potential as productive members of the library staffs. For purposes of merit increases, promotions, and career status actions, it is the duty of these committees to assess an individual’s performance during a given review period to determine if a merit, promotion, or career status action should be recommended. Review committees should refer to APM - 360 for information concerning appointment, merit increase, promotion, and career status actions.
In conducting its review and arriving at its judgment concerning a candidate, each review committee shall be guided by the criteria as mentioned in
APM - 360-10 and described in APM - 210-4-e.
c. Maintenance of the Committees’ Effectiveness
(1) The deliberations and recommendations of the review committees are to be strictly confidential. The membership and report of each ad hoc review committee are confidential. The chair of each committee shall remind members of the confidential nature of the assignment. This requirement must be kept in mind when arrangements are made through the Chancellor for written or oral communications. When recommendations with supporting documents have been forwarded to the Chancellor, all copies or preliminary drafts shall be destroyed. Under the provisions of APM - 360-80-l, the candidate is entitled to receive from the Chancellor a redacted copy of the confidential documents in the academic review record (without disclosure of the identities of members of the ad hoc review committee and without separate identification of the evaluation and recommendation made by the ad hoc review committee).
(2) The entire system of review by such committees depends for its effectiveness upon each committee’s prompt attention to its assignment and its conduct of the review with all possible dispatch, consistent with judicious and thorough consideration of the case.
(3) The chair of the review committee has the responsibility for making sure that each member of the committee has read and understands these instructions.
d. Procedures
(1) General - Recommendations for appointments, merit increases, promotions, and career status actions typically originate with the department or unit head, herein called the review initiator, (see APM - 360-80-e). The letter of recommendation shall provide a comprehensive assessment of the candidate’s qualifications, together with detailed evidence to support the evaluation. The letter should also present a report of consultation with appropriate members of the professional library staff and others in a position to evaluate performance and should include any dissenting opinions. In the case of an appointment, opinions from colleagues in other institutions where the candidate has served and from other qualified persons having firsthand knowledge of the candidate’s attainments are to be included, if feasible. In the review of a proposed merit increase, promotion, or career status action (the general procedure for all shall typically be the same, subject to any special campus procedures), extramural evidence, when it can be obtained, is highly desirable although not required.
(2) Assessment of Evidence - The review committee shall assess the adequacy of the evidence submitted.
If, in the committee’s judgment, the evidence is incomplete or inadequate to enable it to reach a clear recommendation, the committee shall solicit additional information through the Chancellor and request amplification or new material. In every case, all obtainable evidence shall be carefully considered.
If, according to such evidence, the candidate fails to meet the criteria set forth in APM - 210-4-e, the committee should recommend against the proposed action.
If, on the other hand, there is evidence of unusual achievement and exceptional promise of continued growth, the committee should not hesitate to endorse or propose a recommendation for higher rank or higher salary point within rank which would constitute an accelerated advancement of an appointee.
e. Criteria
(1) Appointments - A candidate for appointment to this series shall have a professional background of competence, knowledge, and experience to assure suitability for appointment to this series. Such background will typically include a professional degree from a library school with a program accredited by the American Library Association. However, a person with other appropriate degree(s) or equivalent experience in one or more fields relevant to library services may also be appointed to this series.
Selection of an individual to be appointed to the rank of Assistant Librarian is based upon the requirements of the position with due attention to the candidate’s demonstrated competence, knowledge and experience. A person appointed as Assistant Librarian without previous professional library experience should typically be appointed at the first salary point. A person who has had previous experience relevant to the position may be appointed to one of the higher salary points in this rank, depending on the candidate’s aptitude, the extent of prior experience, and/or the requirements of the position.
A candidate with extensive previous relevant experience and superior qualifications may be appointed to one of the two higher ranks in the series. The criteria for the appointment to either of these levels will be the same as those for promotion as outlined below.
(2) Merit Increases and Promotions - At the time of original appointment to a title in this series, each appointee shall be informed that continuation, advancement, or promotion is justified only by demonstrated superior professional skills and achievement. In addition, promotion shall be justified by growing competence and contribution to the candidate’s position, and/or the assumption of increased responsibility. This is assessed through objective and thorough review. If, on the basis of a review, the individual does not meet the criteria for advancement there is no obligation on the part of the University to continue or advance the appointee. Promotion may also be tied to position change. The assumption of administrative responsibilities is not a necessary condition for promotion.
(3) In considering individual candidates, reasonable flexibility is to be exercised in weighing the comparative relevance of the criteria listed below. A candidate for merit increase or promotion in this series shall be evaluated on the basis of professional competence and quality of service rendered within the library and, to the extent that they are relevant, one or more of the following: professional activity outside the library; University and public service; and research and other creative activity.
(a) Professional Competence and Quality of Service Within the Library - Although contribution in each of the following areas will vary considerably from person to person, depending on each person’s primary functions as a librarian, performance and potential shall be reviewed and evaluated in any or all of the five major areas of librarianship: obtaining, organizing, and providing access to information; curating and preserving collections of scholarly, scientific, cultural, or institutional significance; engaging with users to provide them with guidance and instruction on the discovery, evaluation, and use of information resources; carrying out research and creative activity in support of the foregoing and for the continual improvement of the profession; and library administration and management. Additionally, librarians should be judged on consistency of performance, grasp of library methods, command of their subjects, continued growth in their fields, judgment, leadership, originality, ability to work effectively with others, and ability to relate their functions to the more general goals of the library and the University. Evidence of professional competence and effective service may include, but is not limited to, the opinions of professional colleagues, particularly those who work closely or continuously with the appointee; the opinions of faculty members, students, or other members of the University community as to the quality of a collection developed, for example, or the technical or public service provided by the candidate; the opinions of librarians outside the University who function in the same specialty as the candidate; the effectiveness of the techniques applied or procedures developed by the candidate; and relevant additional educational achievement, including programs of advanced study or courses taken toward improvement of language or subject knowledge.
(b) Professional Activity Outside the Library - A candidate’s professional commitment and contribution to the library profession should be evaluated by taking account of such activities as the following: membership and activity in professional and scholarly organizations; participation in library and other professional meetings and conferences; consulting or similar service; outstanding achievement or promise as evidenced by awards, fellowships, grants; teaching and lecturing; and editorial activity.
(c) University and Public Service - Evaluation of a candidate’s University and public service should take into account University-oriented activities, including, but not limited to the following: serving as a member or chair of administrative committees appointed by the Chancellor, University Librarian, or other University administrative officers; serving as a member or chair of other University committees, including those of student organizations and of the departments and schools other than the library, such as serving on undergraduate or graduate portfolio committees. Public service includes professional librarian services to the community, state, and nation.
(d) Research and Other Creative Activity - Research by practicing librarians has a growing importance as library, bibliographic, and information management activities become more demanding and complex. It is therefore appropriate to take research into account in measuring a librarian’s professional development. The evaluation of such research or other creative activity should be qualitative and not merely quantitative and should be made in comparison with the activity and quality appropriate to the candidate’s areas of expertise. Note should be taken of continued and effective endeavor. This may include authoring, editing, reviewing or compiling books, articles, reports, handbooks, manuals, and/or similar products that are submitted or published during the period under review.
f. The Report
(1) The report of the review committee(s) forms the basis for further administrative review and action by the Chancellor. Consequently, the report should include an assessment of all significant evidence, favorable and unfavorable. It should be specific and analytical, should include the review committee’s evaluation of the candidate with respect to the qualifications specified, and should be adequately documented by reference to the supporting material.
(2) The review committee has the responsibility of making an unequivocal recommendation. No member should subscribe to the report if it does not represent that member’s judgment. If the committee cannot come to a unanimous decision, the division of the committee and the reasons therefore should be communicated either in the body of the report or in separate concurring or dissenting statements by individual members, submitted with the main report and with the cognizance of the other committee members.
Rev. 10/01/18