You are here

Librarian Review Cycle

Related Topics

13 items matched

Library human resources coordinates the librarian review cycle process in accordance with Berkeley Procedures, the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), and the Academic Personnel Manual (APM...

Librarian Review Timetable 2017-2018
for Academic Promotion and Career Status Reviews

November 1-15, 2017:

Review initiators will confer with librarians. Any recommendations for an off-cycle review for a librarian who is not scheduled for an automatic review during this review period should be brought to the Library Human Resources Department's attention by November 15. Review initiators and...

Librarian Review Timetable 2017-2018
for Academic Merit and Special Reviews

November 1-15, 2017:

Review initiators will confer with librarians. Any recommendations for an off-cycle review for a librarian who is not automatically scheduled for a merit review during this review period should be brought to the Library Human Resources Department's attention by November 15. Candidates and review...

The review initiator's evaluation provides a comprehensive evaluation of the candidate's performance and accomplishments both within and beyond the primary assignment for the period under review. It brings to bear direct knowledge of the candidate as well as knowledge gleaned from letters of reference, the candidate's documentation and other sources.

With input from the candidate, the review initiator...

Supporting documentation should be selective, judiciously chosen and relevant to the period under review.

Merit reviews, Assistant and Associate Librarian ranks:

When the candidate and review initiator agree that a standard merit increase is warranted, documentation is normally limited to the candidate's self-evaluation and the review initiator's evaluation. The self-evaluation should not exceed 2-3...

Introductory paragraph, stating what this self-evaluation will support; merit increase, greater than standard merit increase, promotion, career status, off-cycle, or special review. Section I -- Professional competence and quality of service within the library (including attachments submitted as appendices, when appropriate)
This section analyzes a candidate's performance; it is done in the context of a...

The Librarians Association of the University of California-Berkeley, with the advice and support of CAPA, have developed the following guidelines for composing the self-evaluation. These guidelines, which are based on the language of the APM, should clarify and simplify the review process.

The candidate's self-evaluation is a concise narrative statement citing the most significant achievements of the...

D. Reconsideration Process

(final decision maker: Vice Provost)

Candidate may request redacted copies of all confidential material in the review file (which at this stage would include CAPA and ad hoc letters).

Candidate may request an informal meeting with the University Librarian, or, in affiliated library cases, with the dean or director.

Candidate makes decision whether to proceed with a...

C. Final Decision

(final decision maker: University Librarian or Vice Provost for the Faculty in affiliated library cases)

CAPA may confer with University Librarian regarding cases in the Library. CAPA may confer with Vice Provost regarding cases in the affiliated libraries. Final decision maker decides and informs candidate in a letter, with a copy to CAPA.

B. Peer and Administrative Review

(CAPA, ad hoc committees, other administrative reviewers)

LHRD makes all cases available to CAPA and promotion and career status cases available to ad hoc committees.

For promotion and career status reviews, CAPA nominates ad hoc review committee members and conveners. Final decision makers make appointments.

Ad hoc committee convenes, reviews dossier,...

Pages