Library Policy #36: Annual Review Process for Library Faculty

1.0 Purpose

2.0 Annual Review Period

3.0 Annual Evaluation Process

4.0 Criteria and Ratings for Professional Competence

5.0 Criteria and Ratings for Professional Growth and Development

6.0 Criteria and Ratings for Service

7. 0 Merit Evaluation

1.0 Purpose

The purpose of the Annual Review Process for Librarians is to establish guidelines for Annual and Merit Evaluation for Library Faculty.  This policy follows the procedures and guidelines in the Faculty Administration Manual and the calendar posted on the website of the Office of Academic Affairs.

2.0 Annual Review Period

Each librarian will be evaluated annually on the basis of performance over the last calendar year at the College.

3.0  Annual Evaluation Process

3.1 The librarian will provide his/her supervisor with

3.1.1 Current curriculum vitae

3.1.2 A brief (one page) narrative (sentences, not bullets) of accomplishments over the past calendar year. Probationary library faculty will submit additional evidence such as syllabi, procedures, publications-in –process, project descriptions, web pages, etc.  The narrative will address those goals that were attained, the degree of attainment, and the goals that were not attained in the areas of

3.1.3 Copies or electronic links to all accompanying documentation such as journal publications

3.1.4 Goals for the upcoming year organized under three headings:

3.1.5 A brief (one page) narrative/bullets of key accomplishments over the past three calendar years that will be used for the merit review process.

3.2  The immediate supervisor will provide a written evaluation of the librarian’s strengths, weaknesses and suggestions for improvement and approve the goals and objectives for the upcoming year. The supervisor should include a statement for each librarian “If you are coming up for tenure or promotion, you should consider…”  The supervisor and the librarian should meet to discuss the evaluation and goals for the upcoming year.  

3.3  The appropriate assistant dean or head of Special Collections will also provide a written evaluation of the librarian’s performance. The dean, assistant dean, head of Special Collections or librarian may request a meeting to discuss the evaluation.  

3.4  With recommendations from the appropriate assistant deans or head of Special Collections, the dean of libraries will assign a performance rating to each of the three areas (Professional Competence, Professional Growth and Development, and Service) and an aggregate rating overall performance.  The 4 ratings are:

3.5 The dean, supervisor, and librarian should all sign and date the evaluation.

3.6 Note that evaluations for untenured librarians and librarians undergoing review for promotion require evidence beyond that normally provided in the annual evaluation process.  These specific requirements are detailed in the Faculty Administration Manual, in the policies and procedures of faculty committees, Academic Affairs and the academic departments. While these evaluations either augment or substitute for annual evaluations, the librarian undergoing evaluation still needs to produce a one page statement of accomplishments and a statement of goals for the merit review process.

4.0 Criteria and Ratings for Professional Competence

4.1 Criteria for Professional Competence

Librarians will be judged on

4.2  Exceptional Performance Rating:

In addition to the faculty member's meeting the responsibilities of the position, the assignment of EXCEPTIONAL is based on the faculty member's consistently making contributions which expand the scope of the position. The quality, innovation, sustained effort, reliability, and initiative demonstrated by the faculty member are taken into account in assigning this rating.  Characteristics of EXCEPTIONAL could include but are not limited to:

4.3 Highly Effective Performance Rating:

In addition to the librarian meeting the responsibilities of the position, Highly Effective is based on the librarian’s frequency of making contributions over and above those associated with the position in several areas of job responsibility.  These additional contributions are evaluated for their quality, innovation and initiative.  The characteristics of Highly Effective could include but are not limited to:

4.4 Effective Performance Rating

The assignment of EFFECTIVE is based upon the faculty member's consistently and adequately meeting the responsibilities of the position; that is, the faculty member has mastered responsibilities of the position and evidences this in his/her practice of librarianship. It may be further characterized by the faculty member's participation in a project that has not yet achieved results or by occasional additional contributions that are limited in their impact upon service in the faculty member's area of job responsibility. The characteristics of EFFECTIVE performance could include but are not limited to

4.5 Unsatisfactory Performance Rating:

The assignment of UNSATISFACTORY is based upon the faculty member’s inadequately meeting the responsibilities of the position. Performance is often unacceptable, displaying an unprofessional attitude and requiring close supervision; tasks must often be redone to correct errors. The characteristics of UNSATISFACTORY performance could include but are not limited to:

5.0 Criteria and Ratings for Professional Growth and Development

5.1 Criteria for Professional Growth and Development

Professional growth and development activity by librarians is demonstrated through evidence of a thorough understanding of and commitment to the field of librarianship as a whole.  Scholarly activity is encouraged and, in fact, is considered to be a natural result of the practice of librarianship.  Evidence of such activity may be demonstrated through involvement in professional associations, research leading to publications or presentations, and continuing education.  

5.2 Exceptional Performance Rating:

Has evidence of significant contributions to the profession through such efforts as but not limited to:

        publishing an article or review essay in a peer-reviewed journal

        publishing book, book chapter, or edited volume

        presenting a scholarly paper at a conference or workshop

        conducting professional workshop, seminar or conference

        editing books and/or periodicals

        receiving and/or administering externally funded grants

        receiving fellowships and/or awards for scholarly activities

5.3 Highly Effective Performance Rating

Has evidence of significant contributions to the profession through such efforts as but not limited to:

 

 5.4 Effective Performance Rating:

Has evidence of contributions to the profession through such efforts as but not limited to:

 

5.5 Unsatisfactory Performance Rating:

        No activity during the past year in the areas of involvement in professional associations, research leading to publication or presentation, or continuing education.

 

6.0 Criteria and Ratings for Service

6.1 Criteria for Service

Service and/or outreach activities are an important part of the faculty member's overall contribution and may be integrated into the faculty member's professional position. Faculty members are expected to participate in such activities.  Faculty members are responsible for documenting the impact of their participation in appropriate professional activities which further the service and outreach mission of the library and the College. 

6.2 Criteria for Exceptional Performance:

A significant professional service to multiple constituencies could include but is not limited to taking a leadership role on a standing or ad hoc committees of the College faculty, special committees or task forces, student organizations or significant contribution or officership in organizations at the local, regional, national or international level. Leadership might include planning a conference, preconference, or workshop, chair of a college committee, or other similar activity with demonstrated results.

6.3 Criteria for Highly Effective Performance:

Professional service within the library and at another level or outreach to constituencies outside the college.  Participation in international, national or regional library committees, consortia and associations. Participation includes a leadership role in at least one committee or organization.  

6.4 Criteria for Effective Performance:

Membership on a committee with evidence of active participation.  Professional service within the library or on a local, regional, national or international level, or outreach to constituencies outside the college.

6.5 Criteria for Unsatisfactory Performance: 

No active service/outreach record at any level (library, university, state, regional, national, or international.) 

7. 0 Merit Evaluation

Merit rating covers the last three calendar years of the librarian’s work at the College of Charleston.   With recommendations from the appropriate assistant deans or head of Special Collections, the dean of libraries, using the same four categories as used for the annual evaluation, will assign a merit rating for Professional Competence, Professional Growth and Development, Service and an aggregate rating for overall performance.  

Draft:                 Administrative Group        February 2009

Reviewed:         Librarians, May 2009  

Approved:        Dean, May 2009