1. Read and familiarize yourself with the following documents:
These and other useful documents can be found at http://library.ucr.edu/?view=laucr/peer-review/ .
2. Start early. CACLS cannot emphasize this suggestion enough. Make sure you and your review initiator
a. have sufficient time to make revisions, and
b. take the time to check your file for completeness before it moves forward.
3. Pay attention to deadlines. Note the dates in the Call to Review from the Vice Provost for Academic Personnel (VPAP). Other useful dates can be found in the University Libraries Calendar for the Review Cycle. CACLS recommends that candidates and review initiators use the calendar, highlight the significant dates appropriate to their reviews, and refer to it frequently during the review process.
4. Make sure the file is complete before moving on to the next stage of the process. Do not expect someone further along the line to catch inadequacies. There have been cases where essential pieces of the file were not included and this was not noticed before the file left the Library and arrived at the Academic Personnel Office. Use the Document Inventory List to keep track of what documents are being added to the file.
Note: Although the VPAP or CACLS can ask for clarifying information, neither has a responsibility to solicit information for the purpose of completing the file.
5. We strongly recommend that you request redacted copies of confidential materials in the files (e.g., letters) as they are added to the file:
a. from Library Personnel before the file leaves the Library, or
b. from the Academic Personnel Office after the file leaves the Library (preferably when the review is complete).
1. Write, update or review your Statement of Primary Responsibilities (your job description) first and do not repeat information from it in your Statement of Professional Achievements. Example: If serving on a particular committee is one of your primary responsibilities, do not put it in your Statement of Professional Achievements unless you can site specific accomplishments on the committee which were exemplary and go beyond what would be expected, such as chairing a subcommittee, or volunteering to take minutes.
2. Only include activities and accomplishments for the period under review. Provide dates for activities and accomplishments whenever possible.
3. Length. Excessive length can detract from the case you are trying to make and can even work against you. Avoid too much detail or inclusion of non-essential materials (padding). The Statement of Professional Achievements should be between 2 and 4 pages, with the possible exception of acceleration files, in which a stronger case must be made.
4. Concentrate on the impact of your activities. Use concrete examples.
Example: Do not just say, "I set up the library instruction program for the new X Department," but add: "As a result, five faculty members have already requested that a library instruction session be a part of their next year's course."
5. Ask experienced colleagues for advice on your documentation. Past Chairs of CACLS are a particularly good source of advice, and willing to help.
Career Summary (for promotion, distinguished status and career status)
In cases of promotion to Associate or Librarian rank, advancement to Distinguished Librarian, or career status you MUST provide a summary and review of your entire career (both at UCR and before, if applicable). The "Candidate's Career Summary," should be concise (2-4 pages), highlight career achievements with dates whenever possible, and demonstrate the development and progression of your career. (The Call - Appendix F)
Note: Any promotion, distinguished status or career status file submitted without a "Candidate's Career Summary" WILL be considered incomplete.
In this career summary, it is not appropriate to include accomplishments of the period under review as they are already contained in you Statement of Professional Achievements.
1. Letters are necessary for promotion, acceleration and career status reviews.
2. Letters from colleagues within the Library should be avoided, if only because you are disqualifying such colleagues from sitting on any committee that will review you. Note that unsolicited letters that contribute materially to the review may be added to the file. (PAM 2.1, IV, 5)
3. As a courtesy to those who will write your reference letters, let them know in advance:
a. When the Library will be requesting letters, and
b. When the letters will be due in the Library Personnel Office.
(Use the dates from the University Libraries Calendar for the Review Cycle).
For REVIEW INITIATORS:
1. Make sure early on what actions the candidate might be seeking and advise them on the proper documentation. You don't want to be surprised by out of cycle reviews, accelerated merits, deferrals or Librarian promotions.
2. PAM 2.1, IV states that "It is the review initiator's responsibility to ensure the completeness of the candidate's review file..." Do not send incomplete files forward.
3. Consider keeping a file or list of accomplishments and noteworthy observations on each of the librarians which you supervise, adding to it over time. This will help you when it is time to write the review. Example: If you receive a comment from a staff member or patron, or witness a particular reference transaction or class, including mention of it will make for a more compelling file than a laundry list of accomplishments.
4. Do not merely summarize the candidate's statement. Instead, review the performance. Remember to include Impacts.
5. Make sure the recommendation fits your review. There have been occasions where a positive review was unaccountably accompanied by a negative recommendation, and vice versa.
6. Consult PAM 2.2/APM 360-80 for the application of academic review criteria. The review initiator must recommend the correct action and check to see that the file supports it.
7. If you are recommending acceleration, bear in mind that the documentation from both the candidate and the review initiator should completely and convincingly substantiate the recommendation for acceleration. Think in terms of initiative, impact, depth, and breadth. Remember: "Acceleration is an unusual recommendation and is explicitly reserved for those individuals who have performed in an extraordinary manner during the review period." (PAM 2.2, I.C.3)
8. If the candidate you are reviewing is also a supervisor, remember to evaluate the supervisory aspect of her/his work. (Examples: Impressions from the people he or she supervises, particular motivational projects the candidate has instituted, your observations of a well-handled situation etc…)
9. Pass files to the next level as soon as they are completed, the AUL's may have many files to review.
NOTE: A review file can be sent back at any level of the process. Be sure that your file contains the necessary components, both in form and content, because CACLS and the Vice Provost for Academic Personnel (VPAP) can only go by what is included in the file. Check your file against the requirements in PAM 2.1.
This document incorporates advice from Tips for Writing Review Documentation, compiled by Jeff Selth, February 1987. Reviewed annually by CACLS and updated as necessary.
REV. hh 11/03, jbr, kc, pb 11/04
REV. mp 12/06, my 11/07