CRITERIA FOR LIBRARIAN PERSONNEL ACTION


IRVINE: THE UNIVERSITY LlBRARY

March 13, 1981

LAUC-I MEMBERSHP

RE: Criteria for Librarian Personnel Action

Criteria for Librarian Personnel Action is a significant document. It is a cogent expression of the current state of criteria and policies for merit reviews and promotion of Librarians at UCI. This document codifies parts of the review process. I urge all Librarians, both from the perspective of reviewers and reviewees, to read carefully the report; to reflect upon the philosophy expressed; and to be guided throughout the year by its contents. The report will be given to the newly appointed Librarians, as a guide to them in their career development plans at UCI.

This document is a sound foundation upon which to build. I intend to encourage in all quarters on-going discussions of the criteria and the process to insure continuing development toward higher standards for performance and achievement.

Calvin Boyer
University Librarian

CB:mf


CRITERIA FOR LIBRARIAN PERSONNEL ACTION






University of California, Irvine
The Library
5 February 1981



CONTENTS

I. INTRODUCTION

II. GENERAL ASSUMPTIONS

1. Appropriateness of the Academic Personnel Manual
2. Superior Achievement
3. Career Growth
4. Relevance of Activities to Criteria

III. INTERPRETATION

1. Balance
2. Planning
3. Quality
4. Relative Weight of the Criteria

IV. SUMMARY COMMENTS ON GENERAL ASSUMPTIONS AND INTERPRETATION SECTIONS

V. MOUVEMENT THROUGH THE RANKS AND PROMOTION (document adapted from UC Riverside and UC Santa Cruz for use at UC Irvine)

Vl. ACCELERATED MERIT INCREASE (document adapted from UC Davis)

VII. NO ACTION

A. Deferral of Review
B. Denial of Merit or Promotion

VIII. APPENDICES

A. Academic Personnel Manual Section 82-17 b. (1) - (5)
B. Normal Periods of Service - From the Librarian Salary Scale
C. A statement of background information on the peer review process
D. Memo dated March 1, 1979, from Associate Vice Chancellor Carl Hartman to the Chair of the Ad Hoc Review Committee regarding Ad Hoc Committee Reports. This document, currently in force at Irvine, provides guidance and definition regarding the kinds of activities to be included under each criteria in the review process.

I: INTRODUCTION

Proper functioning and application of the peer review process for librarians at UCI necessitates that there be a common understanding of career expectation; to provide a framework for career planning, to guide each librarian toward the superior achievement and growth outlined in the Academic Personnel Manual, and to ensure greater equity in the peer review process. In looking for ways to achieve this common understanding, the LAUC-I Ad Hoc Commitece on Academic Librarianship examined the documentation used in the peer review process on the other eight campuses of the UC system as well as that available at Irvine. What follows is the Committee's effort at synthesizing and combining much of the work already done on the matter of interpretation of the APM criteria as well as the Committee's own comments on the general nature of the review process.

In presenting the attached documentation, the Committee hopes that it will be useful to the incoming librarian in helping him or her arrive at an understanding of what is expected for advancement and promotion, to the incumbent librarian who is anticipating the next review and wants to ensure the most favorable outcome possible, to the unit or department head as guidance in reviewing the librarians within his or her area of responsibility, and for the various review committees in evaluating the documentation presented to them for each review case.

Return to Contents


II. GENERAL ASSUMPTIONS

The purpose of this document is to outline a standardized interpretation of criteria for personnel action in the Librarian Series. It is intended as an augmentation of the guidelines in Sections 82 and 51-4 of the Academic Personnel Manual (APM).

1. Appropriateness of the Academic Personnel Manual

The criteria contained within Sections 82 and 51-4 of the Academic Personnel Manual provide flexible and adequate guidelines for librarians of varying talents and career goals to advance through the ranks in the Librarian Series. As LAUC Position Paper No. 1 states: "expansion of these criteria into detailed lists of expected accomplishments serves no useful purpose because of the adaptable nature of the criteria and the individuality of each career." This adaptability represents one of the major differences between the Librarian Series as an academic career ladder and other series that require a more rigid and task-oriented set of expectations. Flexibility concerning the relative weight of the criteria is a key concept. Section 51-4 e. (3) states:

In considering individual candidates, reasonable flexibility is to be exercised in weighing the comparative relevance of these criteria. However, demonstrated superior professional ability and attainment are indispensable qualifications for promotion.

2. Superior Achievement

Section 51-4 e. (2) dealing with merit increases and promotions states:

At the time of original appointment to a title in this series, each appointee shall be informed that continuation or advancement is justified only by superior achievement and qualities as manifested by the appointee. Therefore, only librarians of demonstrated ability and achievement will be continued or promoted after objective and thorough review. If an individual has not demonstrated requisite development, there is no obligation on the part of the University to continue or promote.

The concept of superior achievement is present throughout the sections of the APM that deal with librarians. An absolute definition of the meaning of "superior" is probably not possible or desirable. One way to understand what is meant is to examine what is not included. Mere adequacy of performance is not enough; superior achievement does not mean doing essentially the same work at the same level of expertise over an extended period of time. Documented evidence of growth and development is needed. Since the University is not obligated to promote, it is possible for individuals to "top out" at certain levels. However, even in these cases, a continuing high level of performance is expected in order for an individual to be continued in the series.


3. Career Growth

Section 89-10 c. states:

Demonstrated superior professional ability and attainment are indispensable qualifications for promotion to the ranks of Associate Librarian and Librarian. However, such promotion should be justified not only by excellence of service and attainment, but also by demonstrated professional growth and accomplishment and/or the assumption of greater responsibility.

Section 51-4 e. (2) states:

For some, promotion may involve a position change; for others promotion may not necessarily involve position change, but will depend on increased responsibility as well as growing competence and contribution in the same position. It is evident that growth is a central concept in the APM. Growth implies the achievement of increasing expertise in the primary assignment throughout the career. In addition, it is necessary to look outside the immediate confines of the position toward what might be, not just what is. An individual's professional interests and activities should increase in depth and breadth as his or her career progresses. Advancement or promotion is awarded in recognition of the increasing expertise and higher level of contribution that a librarian must demonstrate over the years. For example, performance expectations for Associate Librarian, Step V are higher than those for Associate Librarian, Step II. Growth should not take place haphazardly, but should reflect the concepts of relevance, balance, planning, and quality.


4. Relevance of Activities to Criteria

By way of introduction to the four categories of criteria upon which librarians are reviewed, Section 82-10 b. states:

A candidate for merit increase or promotion in this series shall be judged on the basis of the first of the following criteria, and to the extent they are relevant, on one or more of the last three.

As the librarian advances in the series, he or she should become an increasingly valuable asset to the Library and to the profession. The requisite career development must enhance both the quality of the specific position responsibilities and the overall value of the individual to the institution. Activities that contribute to this end must be selected with foresight. This requires judgment on the part of the librarian and the unit or department head to ensure that activities are relevant to and of value to the Library. The concepts of balance, planning, and quality of the contribution serve as important guidelines for determining relevance.


Return to Contents

III. INTERPETATION

1. Balance

Each librarian should strive toward a balanced (i.e. complete or full) career. Balance in this context is developmental. It is not static and does not imply a leveling. A beginning Assistant Librarian's career is necessarily unbalanced initially as the individual devotes the majority of his or her time and efforts toward learning and carrying out the primary responsibility. However, as the career develops, the concept of balance should lead the librarian away from almost exclusive concentration on the primary responsibility toward increasing involvement with one or more of the activities in criteria 2-4. A balanced and mature career must demonstrate achievement in one or more of criteria 2-4 as well as superiority in criterion 1.

Changing circumstances and conditions might make concentration on one particular activity (whether the primary responsibility or one or the activities under criteria 2-4) desirable or beneficial at a given time. Such a temporary imbalance, where justified for good reasons, should not adversely affect a librarian's career. However, over an extended period of time, single-minded concentration in any one activity, to the exclusion of other activities, is not enough to justify continued advancement. Nowhere is it suggested that, as a librarian advances through the ranks, any long-term decrease in the level of performance of the primary responsibilities is acceptable.

Balance is not attained by undertaking activities in all four areas merely to show some activity in each. There is no requirement that a career must develop in all four areas. A smattering of mediocre or low-level performance in all the areas would be unsatisfactory. The activities chosen must be of value and relevance to the librarian's career and to the Library and should show evidence of planned growth.

2. Planning:

Activities should be selected with reference to overall career planning so that fragmentation of effort is avoided. To prevent random or unbalanced career development, the librarian must carefully plan so that the activities undertaken contribute toward the achievement of career goals. In planning career development, the librarinn should made sure that personal goals and objectives are compatible with and contribute to departmental and institutional goals and objectives. Career plans should not be rigid. In addition, the librarian should be prepared to make changes in career plans as the profession evolves in response to changing circumstances. What is important is that a random and haphazard approach be avoided; activities should instead be relevant to the career, of value to the Library, and should reflect conscious planning.

3. Quality:

There is a direct link between the quality of the career and the quality of the work performed. Advancement is predicated upon increasing quality of performance in the primary assignment, the quality or level of the outside activities, and the quality of the contribution to them. Obviously, for example, passive attendance at meetings does not rank as high as active participation (e.g,, chairing a committee, serving on a panel, presenting a paper, or making substantive contributions to discussions).

4. Relative Weight of the Criteria

From the previous points and discussions, it should be possible to arrive at an understanding of this controversial issue. The first criterion remains of primary importance and in any review action should be so weighted. However, a librarian's career must grow and develop as must the quality and quantity of his or her contribution. This growth and development means that as the career advances, increasing attention must be given to one or more of criteria 2-4 (though never to the detriment of the quality of performance under criterion 1). In the review process, therefore, increasing weight will be given to high quality performance in criteria 2-4 as the individual progresses within the Associate and Librarian ranks.

Return to Contents

IV. SUMMARY COMMENTS ON GENERAL ASSUMPTIONS AND INTERPRETATION SECTIONS

The key issue is the quality and development of the overall career as it contributes to the improvement of library services and to the advancement of the profession. It should be clear that an individual with an outstanding career will, in the development of that career, have made substantive contributions to the institutions with which he or she has been associated and to the profession as a whole. It is important to state, however, that the emphasis is on service to the institution and the patrons it serves and to the profession and not on "careerism" or career building for its own sake. In this context, it is important to recognize the criteria in the APM for what they are: essentially artificial and arbitrary categories which are used in an attempt to provide a degree of order, fairness, and uniformity in the process of periodic career evaluation. Librarians should use these criteria to their own benefit, but should not mold a career simply to fit them. It is for these reasons that flexibility and judgment are crucial and central to the APM and to this present document. The desired outcome of the process is a career such as outlined above rather than one which has been tailored merely to fit the criteria for evaluation.

In carrying out the concepts in this document, it is necessary to recognize the important role of counseling. While it is true that each individual librarian is responsible for his or her own career and for understanding and striving to fulfill the advancement and promotion concepts outlined in this document, the Department or Unit Head has the responsibility, both at the time of the review and during the period between reviews, to counsel the librarians for whom he or she is review initiator. This is especially true for individuals who may not be meeting the standards necessary for continued advancement. Additionally, after a review has taken place, it is important that the person under review be given feedback and counseling, especially if the outcome of the review has not been favorable to the candidate and/or if the librarian under review is in potential career status and has not been given a merit increase when eligible.


Return to Contents

V. MOVEMENT THROUGH RANKS AND PROMOTION

Several personnel actions are possible: merit, promotion, termination, and no action (which may result from a deferral of review or which may be the end result of a recommendation for merit, promotion, or termination). Accelerated advancement is warranted when accomplishments during the review period are unusual and clearly beyond expectations. Denial of merit at any rank or step does not prohibit later advancement or promotion.

Section 82-10 (APM) sets forth four criteria against which a candidate is to be judged for personnel action:

Criterion 1: Professional competence and quality of Service within the Library.

Criterion 2: Professional activity outside the Library.

Criterion 3: University and public service.

Criterion 4: Research and other creative activity.

In all ranks, it is understood that under Criterion 1, all librarians will 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.

Study and research beyond the immediate demands of the position are essential to continued growth, continuing command of subject, and continuing ability to relate functions to more general goals. Individuals should seek opportunities to learn and to contribute to the improvement of the Library's services. Leadership is demonstrated in activity beyond the implementation of goals or ideas already in concrete form. The kind of leadership expected is that which focuses on and identifies goals and programs, conceptualizes them, and generates and carries out ideas which prove workable. Originality of ideas or concepts may be demonstrated in one's area of specialization or in research and writing. It includes self-motivated study of appropriately selected problems and original or workable resolution of them. It is also understood that the level of competence and the scope of contribution required for a one-step merit increase become greater as a librarian advances in rank.

In reviews of UCI librarians who engage in interdepartmental activity, the department or unit head reviewing the major portion of a candidate's performance must take into account evaluations from others supervising a candidate's work.

In consideration of individual candidates and circumstances, reasonable flexibility must be exercised in applying the criteria. In this document, the interpretation and weighting of the criteria are discussed in relation to six separate phases of movement through the Librarian Series:

I. Assistant Librarian - Movement through the Rank

II. Promotion to Associate Librarian

III. Associate Librarian - Movement through the Rank

IV. Promotion to Librarian

V. Movement through the Librarian Rank

VI. Promotion to Librarian, Step V

In the Associate Librarian and Librarian ranks (and to some degree in the highest steps of the Assistant Librarian rank), the concept of balance between Criterion 1 and Criteria 2-4 is extremenly important. It is recognized that occasionally, for any one review period or portion thereof, organizational or professional pressures, etc., may make the optimum balance difficult to achieve. In this situation, the department head and the candidate should work together to restore the balance. However, a temporary imbalance, where the factors accounting for it can be clearly identified and justified, should not adversely affect the merit action.

In all ranks, there are two possible types of status: potential career and career. An appointee is considered in potential career status until achieving career status through promotion or upon successful completion of the trial period. A career status review must take place within a certain period of years depending upon the rank in which the initial appointment is made and the step within that rank at which the appointment is made. If career status is not granted, the appointee is subject to termination. For further explanation of these provisions and time periods, refer to Appendix A which quotes the relevant paragraphs from the APM Section 82-17 b.

I. Assistant Librarian - Movement through the rank

Primary emphasis is on Criterion 1, with increased expectations for breadth and depth of understanding with movement through the rank. Specifically, emphasis is on:

1. Quality of performance in the primary area of responsibility.

2. Steady work toward a sound professional foundation.

3. Growth through demonstrated gains in basic abilities and in principles underlying the primary responsibility.

4. Acceptance, and competent execution, of responsibilities in addition to those of the position (to a level and scope in keeping with the step in rank), such as service on administrative or LAUC committees, task forces, etc.

Consideration of Criteria 2-4 normally will not play a major role in advancement through the lower steps of the rank. However, since promotion to Associate Librarian is based, among other factors, on potential for further growth, the Assistant Librarian should, by the time advancement to Step III in this rank has taken place, or by the time of the second review if the individual was brought in at a step higher than Step I, begin to demonstrate activity in some areas within Criteria 2-4.

Denial of merit for those in the Assistant Librarian rank may occur when performance during the review period does not meet the criteria guidelines established for performance in this rank. If denial of merit does occur during time in rank and step, and performance does not improve significantly during the following year, termination might be an appropriate action according to APM 51-4. e. (2).

For Assistant Librarians, the conferral of career status does not occur except in conjunction with promotion to Associate Librarian. If promotion does not occur within a reasonable trial period, the individual is subject to termination according to APM, 82-17. b. (1).

II. Promotion to Associate Librarian

Promotion to Associate Librarian is not automatic. It must be justified by an increasingly higher level of performance through the rank of Assistant Librarian. Specifically, the recommendation for promotion is based on:

1. Demonstrated potential for further growth, including assumption of a broader role in the activities of the Library, the campus, the University, and the profession.

2. Demonstrated professional skills acquired through performance of position responsibilities in the Assistant Librarian rank.

3. A solid record of professional competence in assigned responsibilities.

4. Anticipation of competence in the Associate Librarian rank.

III. Associate Librarian - Movement Through the Rank

Movement through the rank of Associate Librarian is based on the achievement of a balance between a continuing high level of performance and growth in the primary position responsibilities and significant contributions in areas within Criteria 2-4. The librarian must demonstrate interest in and ability to contribute to the overall field, Library, and system. The quality of the contribution, not just quantity, must be emphasized. Similarly, the level of the contribution must be higher than at the Assistant rank.

For Associate Librarians, a request or recommendation for deferral may be appropriate if in the opinion of the individual, the department head, or the University Librarian, the individual's performance does not demonstrate the expected balance of activity within the criteria unless the factors accounting for this imbalance can be clearly identified and justified. However, requests for deferral may be denied if reasons specified are not sufficient to warrant a deferral.

For Associate Librarians, the weighting of the criteria and expected levels of performance place greater weight on balance among the criteria with the balance shifting from emphasis on competent performance of primary assignments, focusing instead on breadth and depth of professional activity within the Library, the University, and the profession. Unless significant contributions are shown in other criteria as identified in the Academic Personnel Manual, denial of merit may result, even with competent performance of the primary position responsibilities. Absence of documented competence and growth in primary position responsibilities would also result in denial of merit. Continued performance at an unsatisfactory level, particularly in potential career status, may make that individual subject to termination.

IV. Promotion to Librarian

Premotion to the Librarian rank is not automatic. The top step of the Associate Librarian rank may be the appropriate indefinite rank and step for many librarians. A recommendation for promotion is based on the following:

1. Consistent and sustained demonstration of outstanding professional ability, emphasizing depth and breadth of contributions and experience.

2. Assumption of greater responsibility.

3. Emphasis on the strength of the career, particularly within the Associate rank.

4. Anticipation of ability to perform successfully in the Librarian rank.

5. Demonstrated ability to balance superior performance of primary responsibilities with broader concerns for the Library as a whole, the profession, the campus, the system, etc.

Section 51-4 e. (APM) states: "advancement in rank is possible in any special field of librarianship. However, an appointee will be eligible for promotion to the rank of Librarian only if there is demonstrated outstanding ability. For some, promotion may involve position change, but will depend on increased responsibility as well as growing competence and contribution in the same position."

Promotion is possible for candidates with or without administrative responsibilities. In addition, technical competence or administrative responsibilities alone are not sufficient for promotion. Accomplishment in Criterion 1 alone is not sufficient. The candidate must contribute in areas within Criteria 2-4. Promotion may be recommended for candidates whose influence, impact, and creative approach to librarianship through activity in any of the criteria are outstanding and go beyond the confines of the immediate responsibilities of the position. Denial of promotion to Librarian does not necessarily constitute a judgment of unsatisfactory performance.

V. Librarian - Movement Through the Rank

Movement through the rank to Step IV is not automatic. When a recommendation for merit action is made, it must be based on substantive, continued, and extended accomplishment and balance, specifically showing:

1. Realization of potential for superior professional performance and attainment.

2. Sustained quality contributions in a breadth of activity.

3. Contribution to and communication of expertise to the Library, campus, system, etc.

For Librarians, a request or recommendation for deferral may be appropriate if in the opinion of the individual, the department head, or the University Librarian, the individual's performance does not demonstrate the expected balance of activity within the criteria unless the factors accounting for this imbalance can be clearly identified and justified. However, requests for deferral may be denied if reasons specified are not sufficient to warrant a deferral.

For Librarians, the weighting of the criteria and expected levels of performance place greater emphasis on balance among the criteria than at the Associate Librarian rank, focusing on breadth and depth of professional activity within the Library, the University, and the profession. Unless significant contributions are shown in other criteria as identified in the APM, denial of merit may result, even with competent performance of the position responsibilities. Absence of documented competence in primary assignments would also result in denial of merit. Continued performance at an unsatisfactory level, particularly in potential career status, may make that individual subject to termination.

VI. Advancement to Librarian, Step V

Advancement from Step IV to Step V is reserved for librarians with a truly distinguished career history, who have demonstrated significant achievement since obtaining Step IV.



Return to Contents

V. ACCELERATED MERIT INCREASE

Section 51-4e. (2) of the APH states that "...accelerated promotion is possible if achievement is exceptional." It is expected that an accelerated merit increase or promotion will be rare, reserved for an individual who has performed in a truly outstanding manner during the period under review. In judging exceptional achievement, the overall record must be viewed as exceptional. All areas of evaluation must satisfy the basic expectation of excellence. In addition, the candidate's performance in some areas, although not necessarily all, must clearly be ahead of the performance of other individuals at the same rank and step. If the candidate has performed his or her primary responsibilities in an exceptional manner, but has not participated to any relevant or significant extent in activities within Criteria 2-4, the total performance cannot be considered exceptional. Equally, if a candidate has achieved an exceptional performance in activities within Criteria 2-4, yet has not performed his or her primary responsibilities in an excellent manner, the overall performance cannot be considered exceptional.

Return to Contents

VII. NO ACTION

A. DEFERRAL OF REVIEW

A deferral of review may occur upon the initiative of either the candidate or the department head but only for appointees in career status. The candidate may decide, for whatever reason, that he or she does not want to be reviewed at a time when he or she would normally be eligible for review. The department head may decide that a candidate's achievements during the period under review have not been sufficiently meritorious to warrant the normal action and, hence, recommend a deferred review. In this case, the candidate has the option to proceed with a review which would then be designated a contested no action. In all cases of deferrals of review, a no action file must be assembled for the candidate.

B. DENIAL OF MERIT OR PROMOTION

If, during the period under review, a librarian has not shown the superior achievement and qualities required for a merit increase, a recommendation may be made for denial of the proposed action. Both the level of competence and the scope of contributions required for a merit increase or promotion become greater as a librarian advances in rank. Even though performance of specific responsibilities may be superior, it is possible that an individual's total contribution might not justify a recommendation for a given review period. If a librarian is not recommended for a merit increase or promotion when eligible, it does not necessarily mean that the individual is being considered for termination. It may be simply that the performance during that review period is not considered sufficiently meritorious to warrant a recommendation for normal advancement in the series.

In order to assure fair and equitable treatment for appointees at the Associate VI and Librarian IV or V steps, a special review should be conducted after the person has been at step for four consecutive years.

A librarian in potential career status who is not recommended for a merit increase when eligible should consider that such an action is an indication that his or her performance may not merit the awarding of career status.

Return to Contents


APPENDICES

APPENDIX A.

LIBRARIAN SERIES
82-17b. Appointment and Promotion (continued)

b. The following principles and procedures shall be applied to appointments, promotions, and terminations of potential career or career appointees:

(1) An individual holding the rank of Assistant Librarian and whose appointment is not explicitly temporary is considered to be in potential career status for the period of the appointment in this rank. During potential career status, the individual shall be subject to periodic reviews of performance, professional competence, achievement, and promise. If after such reviews, the appointee is promoted from the rank of Assistant Librarian to higher rank in this series, the individual is thereby moved to career status. On the other hand, an Assistant Librarian is subject to termination after due notice if, after thorough review and a reasonable trial period (not more than six years), he or she is not deemed worthy of further advancement.

(2) An individual whose initial appointment in this series is to the rank of Associate Librarian and whose appointment is not explicitly temporary is considerd to be in potential career status for a trial period of not more than four years and not less than two years in the rank, unless promoted sooner to the rank of Librarian. During potential career status, the individual shall be subject to periodic review of performance, professional competence, achievement, and promise. The trial period will be brought to a close with one of three decisions made after appropriate review as specified in Section 51-4: place the appontee in career status with the rank of Associate Librarian; promote to the rank of Librarian with career status; or terminate the appointment after due notice.

(3) An individual who is promoted from career status as an Associate Librarian to the rank of Librarian is thereby continued in career status. However, there is no obligation on the part of the University to promote an Associate Librarian to the rank of Librarian solely on the basis of years of service.

(4) An individual whose initial appointment in this series is to the rank of Librarian and whose appoitment is not explicitly temporary is considered to be a potential career appointee for a trial period of not more than three years and not less than two years in rank. During potential career status, the individual shall be subject to periodic reviews of performance, professional competence, achievement, and promise. The trial period will be brought to a close with one of two decisions made after appropriate review as specified in Section 51-4: place the appointee in career status with the rank of Librarian; or terminate the appointment after due notice.

(5) An appointee in career status either as an Associate Librarian or as a Librarian, having successfully passed the trial period of service, in either one of the ranks or having been promoted to one of these ranks from a lower rank, is expected to continue to perform the duties of the position at a satisfactorily high standard. Reviews of the appointee will be conducted at regular intervals to determine if a merit increase or promotion is indicated. If there is reason to doubt that the career appointee is performing satisfactorily, a thorough review will be conducted by an advisory committee and the appropriate administrative officer; and if this review results in an unfavorable evaluation, the appointee may be subject to termination after due notice. Otherwise, the appointment will be continued. The appeals procedures in Section 191 are available as a protection against arbitrary, capricious, or unreasonable termination.
Rev. 10-31-77 82-17 b.(6)


APPENDIX B
FROM THE LIBRARIAN SALARY SCALE
						Normal
						Period
Title				Step		at Sal.

(a) ASSISTANT LIBRARIAN I 1 yr (3620 - Career Status) II 1 yr (3621 - Potential III 1 yr Career Status) IV 1 yr (3622 - Temporary V 1 yr Status) VI 1 yr (b) ASSOCIATE LIBRARIAN I 1 yr (3616 - Career Status) II 1 yr (3617 - Potential III 2 yr Career Status) IV 2 yr (3618 - Temporary V 2 yr Status) VI 2 yr VII 2 yr (or--) (c) LIBRARIAN I 2 yr (3612 - Career Status) II 2 yr (3613 - Potential III 3 yr Career Status) IV 3 yr (3614 - Temporary (or--) Status) V --

Normal Periods of Service

(a ) Assistant Librarian: See Academic Personnel Manual Section 82-17-b (1) for policy on length of service as Assistant Librarian. The period of service at each step is normally 1 year. The first four steps and the corresponding salary levels are for normal use. Steps V and VI may be used in appropriate situations and with proper justification. The salary for Assistant Librarian, Step V, is identical to that of Associate Librarian, Step I. The salary for Assistant Librarian, Step VI, is identical to that of Associate Librarian, Step II. An Assistant Librarian promoted to Associate Librarian after a year's service at Step V or VI will be advanced to Associate Librarian, Step II or III, respectively.

(b) Associate Librarian: The normal period of service in this rank is 8 years, but the University is under no obligation to promote to the rank of Librarian. Service at Step VII is normally in lieu of promotion to the rank of Librarian and may be of indefinite duration.

(c) Librarian: The normal period of service at step is 2 years in each of the first two steps, 3 years at Step III, and of indefinite duration at Steps IV and V. Advancement to Step V will normally not occur with less than 3 years of service at Step IV, except in unusual cases. Advancement from Step IV to Step V is reserved for Librarians with a distinguished career history who have demonstrated significant achievement since attaining Step IV.


APPENDIX C

BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE PEER REVIEW PROCESS

I. The University of California adopted a new personnel policy for librarians in 1972 that was published in its Academic Personnel Manual (APM) as Sections 51-4 and 82. The changes in the new code had been adopted after 1engthy discussions and meetings between members of LAUC, the Library Council, and Systemwide Administration.

A fundamental change in policy was the establishment of titles which paralleled faculty titles: Assistant Librarian, Associate Librarian, and Librarian. These new titles replaced the civil-service type title formerly used (Librarian I, II, III, IV, and V). The librarians had gained the University's acknowledgement that the concept of rank in the individual rather than in the position was a viable one for librarians. Promotion to the upper ranges of the series could be possible based on academic and professional achievements, rather than mainly supervisory or administrative responsibilities, as had been the case previously.

By providing a career ladder which allowed for creative change and individual initiative, it was hoped that improved methods of service and a higner level of personal growth and achievement would result. The librarian would not be limited by the visions and verdicts of the immediate supervisor, but would also be judged by peers on the basis of individual achievements.

II. Academic Review Criteria

Although librarians' titles paralleled faculty titles, there was significant differences between the review criteria for the two groups. Criteria for faculty in the professorial series emphasized teaching and research, listing "professional competence" third in the hierarchy of review values listed in APM Section 51-1. Academic criteria in APM 51-1d. (1) through (4) are as follows:

(1) Teaching

(2) Research and Creative Work

(3) Professional Competence and Activity

(4) University and Public Service

By contrast, the specific criteria for librarians emphasized professional competence in APM Section 51-4e. (3) (a) through (d).

(a) Professional competence and quality of service within the library

(b) Professional activity outside the library

(c) University and Public Service

(d) Research and other activity

In the lengthy explication of "Professional competence and quality of service within the library" (51-4e. (3) (a)), it was recognized that contributions may vary considerably, depending upon which of the five major areas of librarianship one might be engaged in. Additionally, this section states:

...librarians will 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.

These guidelines are vague and are based on the recognition that teaching and research as traditionally defined are not the primary duties of librarians. Suggested methods of measuring performance are equally vague, and rely heavily on the opinions of others as to the evidence of effective service.

Evidences of effective service may include 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. (51-4e. (3) (a).)

III. Interim Effects of Personnel Policy Changes

Following adoption of the new policy, interpretations of the criteria in 51-4 raised many questions. Local LAUC divisions and statewide groups grappled with problems of equity and uniform interpretation within each library and throughout the system. Statements were adopted and incorporated into LAUC Position Paper No. 1 which were intended to clarify some of the issues.

Since the adoption of APM Sections 82 and 51-4, considerable emphasis has been placed on the first criterion, professional competence in the primary position assignment. This more closely parallels practice, in which the individual's ability on the job is the main consideration for merit increase and retention, than a truly academic pattern of review. However, no systematic educational program bridged the gap of understanding between the old system of review and the new one.


APPENDIX D

IRVINE: OFFICE OF ACADEMIC AFFAIRS

March 1, 1979

TO: CHAIR OF THE AD HOC REVIEW COMMITTEE

RE: Ad Hoc Committee Reports

The attached outline is intended to provide a format for ad hoc review reports. In view of the Roberti legislation (S.B. 251), which is presently being contested by the Regents, it is desirable that the reports of review committees be on a clear basis and speak as exactly as possible to the relevant areas of consideration. The outline was designed with this in mind. (If the committee has any suggestions for modification of the outline which would assist the deliberations or reports of ad hoc review committees in the future, please let me know.)

In a case involving a recommendation for promotion, the committee needs to keep in mind the scope of the review; the committee should examine the dossier carefully with regard to the achievements of the individual for his or her entire period at rank. In the case of a proposed merit increase, the committee will be concerned with the time since the last review. Accelerated actions require particularly strong justification and support. (A recommendation made sooner than the "normal" time is accelerated in time.)

The Library Review Committee has responsibility for an overall view of all recommendations for academic personnel actions. The ad hoc committee has more specialized functions. The ad hoc committee should ask specifically what achievements there have been since the last relevant advancement and what the value of these achievements is. The committee should not hesitate to request further evaluation of publications or other accomplishments if this seems necessary.

The review committee is asked to make a clear recommendation with regard to the proposed action (promotion, merit increase, no action, or termination). If a committee cannot come to a unanimous decision, the division of the committee and the reason therefore should be communicated either in the body of the report or in separate statements by individual members, submitted with the main report and with the cognizance of other committee members.



Carl F. Hartman
Associate Vice Chancellor

Attachment


IRVINE: OFFICE OF ACADEMIC AFFAIRS

ADMINISTRATIVE CONFIDENTIAL

JAMES L. MC GAUGH, EXECUTIVE VICE CHANCELLOR, ACADEMIC AFFAIRS

RE: Recommendation for (person)_________________ for (action) ______________



The ad hoc committee appointed to review the proposed_____________
for_________________ from________________, Step_________,
to_________________, Step___________, met and reviewed the dossier
under the guidelines or Section 82 and 51-4 of the University of California
Academic Personnel Manual
.

According to the criteria, a candidate for promotion or merit increase in the librarian series shall be judged on the basis of (1.) professional competence and quality of service rendered within the Library; (2.) professional activity outside the Library; (3.) University and public service and (4.) research and other creative activity.

Using these criteria, the committee examined the evidence in the dossier and present their findings as follows:

I. Professional Competence and Quality of Service Rendered Within the Library. (Included in this criterion are such qualities as demonstrated superiority of performance of responsibilities covered in the position profile, including demonstrated professional growth and accomplishment and/or the assumption of a breadth of concern. Superior professional ability and attainment are indispensable qualifications for promotion. Membership on administrative and ad hoc committees is included in this criterion as is evidence of continuing education in the area of specialization through attendance of institutes, workshops, etc., the focus of which is on in-service training in the particular area.)

A. Evaluation of the evidence of professional competence and service rendered within the Library as presented in the dossier.

B. Evaluation or areas where improvement is needed including the absence of evidence presented in the dossier.

C. Additional comments and conclusions reached in the evaluation of this criterion.

II. Professional Activity Outside the Library. (Included in this criterion are activities and contributions to scholarly or library organizations outside the Library, including but not limited to CLA, ALA, MLA, SLA, ASIS, IFLA, etc.)

A. Evaluation of the evidence of professional activity outside the Library as presented in the dossier.

B. Evaluation of areas where improvement is needed including the absence of evidence presented in the dossier.

C. Additional comments and conclusions reached in the evaluation of this criterion.

III. University and Public Service. (Included in this criterion are activities such as participation in LAUC and LAUC-I; membership and activities on formal or informal Systemwide committees and groups, or library networks; service in community, state, or national organizations, including but not limited to Friends of the Library, League of Women Voters, city, county, state and national commissions and boards, etc.)

A. Evaluation of the evidence of University and public service as presented in the dossier.

B. Evaluation of areas where improvement is needed including the absence of evidence as presented in the dossier.

C. Additional comments and conclusions reached in the evaluation of this criterion.

IV. Research ant Creative Activity. (Included in this criterion are activities such as development and delivery of instructional programs and courses; participation in projects of demonstrated benefit to library service or users, e.g., the synthesis of new technologies and traditional patterns of service; acquisition of credits or advanced degrees in a specific field, with a commitment to specialization in the field; publication of monographs, research findings, bibliographies, indexes or articles in scholarly journals or other recognized publications; grant activities, other significant creative contributions appropriate to an academic environment,)

A. Evaluation of evidence of research and creative activity as presented in the dossier.

B. Evaluation of areas where improvement is needed including the absence of evidence as presented in the dossier.

C. Additional comments and conclusions reached in the evaluation of this criterion.

In conclusion, the committee....



On the basis of the evidence and our evaluation of it, this committee recommends that________________________________be_____________________.
In addition, we recommend that_______________________be informed of the
following needs for improvement: (This should be understood to
include any relevant concerns resulting from ad hoc deliberations.)



________________________________ ______________________________



________________________________ (Chair)___________________________

Return to Contents