The Process Unleashed!

Peer Review Documentation Workshop 2008-2009

October 7, 2008

Peer Review Documentation Workshop Committee: Julie Kwan (Chair), Alan Carr, Chamya Kincy

Agenda

• Welcome and Introductions• Gary E. Strong: Comments• Jenifer Abramson: The Calendar, Changes to

the Call, and Library Human Resources Support Services

• Peer Review Documentation Workshop Committee: The Process Unleashed!

• Q & A Discussion

2

Peer review – what is it?

• Subjecting your work to the scrutiny of peers for impartial review

• Confidential• A tradition at UCLA for over 35 years• CAPA & Ad Hoc Committees constitute the

peers who provide the impartial review• University Librarian has final decision making

authority but takes CAPA’s advice seriously

3

What are the evaluation criteria?

• Criterion I: Professional competence and quality of service within the library

• Criterion II: Professional activity outside the library

• Criterion III: University and public service• Criterion IV: Research and other creative

activity

4

Criteria I and (II or III or IV)

5

Who’s involved?

• Candidate• Review Initiator• Department Head• AUL• CAPA• Ad Hoc Committee• Letter writers• University Librarian

6

Our guiding light - “The Calendar”

• A timetable for preparing your packet

• Available on LHR website, linked from LAUC-LA web site

• Get critical dates on your calendar!

7

Key Dates

• October 17, 2008 – Deadline for notification about out-of-cycle

actions

• November 19, 2008– Preliminary drafts of documentation due to RI– Preliminary conferences scheduled– Letters of recommendation solicited

8

Key Dates (cont.)

• December 12, 2008– Deadline to request extension

• December 19, 2008– Candidates and RIs conduct final evaluation /

recommendation conferences– Candidates complete final copies of

documentation– RIs prepare final documentation & complete the

peer review file

9

Key Dates (cont.)

• January 30, 2009– AULs prepare evaluations & meet with all parties

• July 1, 2009– Librarians receive letter notifying them of decision• Includes University Librarian assessment• Includes CAPA report• Includes unsigned Ad Hoc Committee report

10

Peer Review Committees

• CAPA: Committee on Appointments, Promotions and Advancements (7 members)– Standing LAUC-LA Committee– Chair-Elect is elected, others appointed by LAUC-

LA Executive Board• Ad hoc committees (3 members)– Anonymous (known only to CAPA Chair or Chair-

elect)– Only for certain types of actions

11

2008/2009 CAPA

Debe Costa, CAPA ChairMaureen Russell, CAPA Chair-ElectAnita ColbyRita CostelloDavid GilbertRhonda LawrenceNancy Norris

12

The CALL

• UCLA Librarians’ CALL: Academic Personnel Procedures for the Librarian Series– Narrative– Definitions– Sample forms

• Available at http://staff.library.ucla.edu/hr/call/index.htm

13

14

15

16

Required Forms

• Documentation and Signature Checklist• Academic Personnel Recommendation– What’s the action?

• Candidate’s Certification Statement– Candidate’s right to exclusions from CAPA and/or

Ad Hoc Committees

TIP! Place documents in the order listed on the Documentation and Signature Checklist

17

What are these actions?• Normal merit• Career status• Promotion• Distinguished status• Acceleration• No action• Deferred review• Candidate-initiated• Off-cycle review• Deceleration

18

Required Documents . . .

From the Librarian• Statement of Responsibilities• Data Summary• Statement of Professional Achievements (SOPA)

From the RI• Evaluation/Recommendation Statement

Supporting Documentation (as needed)

19

Statement of Responsibilities

• Is up-to-date?• Do you have Criterion I changes?– May need separate statements– Use start and end dates– Use percentages (if applicable)

• Prepared jointly by RI & candidate• Review committees use SOR to understand

what falls into Criterion I

20

What are your contributions?

• To your unit• To the library• To the campus• To the profession• To the community

21

Data Summary

• Include Criteria I-IV activities• Excellent instructions in Form 4• Need advice? Ask:– Review Initiator– Other Librarians– Peer Review Documentation Workshop

Committee members– Former CAPA members

• Do not ask current CAPA members!

22

Data Summary CAVEATS!

• No longer includes business meetings attended & visits to other libraries

• Indicate if work was collaborative, i.e., co-authored or co-taught

• Ad Hoc Peer Review Committee service now included

• May include Summary of Instructional Activities (SIA) in packet

23

Criterion I: Professional Competence and Quality of Service Within the Library

• Your job responsibilities• UCLA library organizations,

committees, task forces• Continuing education– degrees– courses

24

Criterion II: Professional Activity Outside the Library

• Professional organizations• Conferences (Attendance and Participation)• Teaching• Honors and Awards• Consulting

Indicate if work was collaborative!

25

Criterion III: University and Public Service

• LAUC– includes Ad Hoc Peer

Review Committees

• Other university service• Public service– Professional librarian

service only

26

Criterion IV: Research and Other Creative Activity

• Published writings• Submissions• Creative work in progress• Other creative work

Indicate if work was collaborative!

27

Statement of Professional Achievements (SOPA)

• The candidate’s document to discuss:– Goals – Accomplishments– Contributions

• What inspires your work?

28

More on the SOPA…

• Not a self-evaluation, but…• Use the SOPA to explicate items on your Data

Summary• Elaborate on activities• Focus on achievements & contributions• Include professional goals– Goals should be clearly stated at the end of the

SOPA

29

Are your goals on target?

30

Goals

Your goals should be• Specific• Measurable• Action-oriented• Relevant• Time bound

Ask these questions• Who?• What?• Where?• When?• Which?• Why?• How?

31

Evaluation/Recommendation Statement

• This statement is written by the RI• Set up a meeting with your RI– Provide a list of Criteria I-IV activities to your RI– Assessment of previous goals– Create new goals

TIP! Provide RI with a list of your most important Criterion 1 activities and accomplishments during the review period, whether or not requested.

32

Supporting Documentation

• Required for promotions and accelerations• Examples:– Letters from faculty, administrators, peers– Publications, including Web pages for which you

are responsible– Unpublished texts – Student evaluations

TIP! Along with names of referees, include a brief description of the specific accomplishment or contribution you would like the person to address in their letter of reference.

33

Tips to Improve Your Packet

Don’t procrastinate Keep track of activities throughout the

review period Define acronyms Organize documentation Refer to documentation PROOFREAD!!!

34

Contact Information

Julie Kwanjkkwan@library.ucla.edu

Alan Carracarr@library.ucla.edu

Chamya Kincyckincy@library.ucla.edu

Jenifer Abramsonjenifera@library.ucla.edu

35