Appendices to Procedures for Peer Review Committees for Library Faculty

*** DRAFT — 2006 updates still being reviewed***,  Last Revised December 13, 2005

Appendix 1 Outline of Promotion Dossier

  1. Personal History and Professional Experience
    1. Provide Educational Background
      (Begin with the baccalaureate degree. Provide the name of institution; degree, field of study; date of degree.)
    2. List of Academic Positions since Final Degree
      (List in chronological order from past to present. For each position held, list inclusive dates, title, and location for each — University of Illinois and elsewhere.)
    3. Other Professional Employment
      (Previous and current — in chronological order as above.)
    4. Honors, Recognitions, and Outstanding Achievements
    5. Invited Lectures and Invited Conference Presentations Since Last Promotion
    6. Offices Held in Professional Societies
    7. Editorships of Journals or Other Learned Publications
    8. Grants Received Since Last Promotion at UIUC
      (List principal investigator first, any co-PI’s, granting agency, dates of grant, and dollar amount.)
    9. Review Panels (e.g., for Governmental Agencies, Educational Institutions)
  2. Publications and Creative Works
    # Denotes any publication derived from the candidate’s thesis.* Denotes publication that has undergone stringent editorial review by peers.

    + Denotes publication that was invited and carries special prestige and recognition.

    (Additional symbols may be used to denote other noteworthy features. Please define.)

    1. Doctoral thesis title
    2. Books Authored or Co-Authored (in print or accepted)
    3. Books Edited or Co-Edited (in print or accepted)
    4. Chapters in Books (in print or accepted)
    5. Monographs (in print or accepted)
    6. Articles in Journals (in print or accepted)
    7. Creative Works (Exhibitions, Commissions, Competitions, Performances, Art or Architecture Executed)
    8. Bulletins, Reports, or Conference Proceedings (in print or accepted)
    9. Abstracts (in print or accepted)
    10. Book Reviews (in print or accepted)
    11. Other
  3. Resident Instruction
      1. Summary of Librarianship and Instruction
        1. Descriptive Data: Librarianship.
          This section, in paragraph form, should summarize your primary responsibilities in Librarianship and briefly describe your most important accomplishments.  This section should complement the “Statement of Librarianship” by briefly describing your most significant contributions in Librarianship.  The following areas are given for guidance only.  You may construct your own categories as appropriate, e.g.  “User services” instead of reference, user education and faculty liaison.  It is expected that no more than three area will be addressed here.
        2. Collection development of materials: includes materials selection, collection analysis and evaluation, collection policy statements, replacement policies, weeding policies, acquisitions lists, development of vendor/publisher relationships, management of approval plans and blanket orders, management of serials, or other activities related to collection development.
        3. Preservation: includes selection and assessment of materials for preservation and replacement activities, disaster planning and security, managing preservation projects, application of preservation techniques to library materials, preservation training of staff, working with preservation conservators and vendors to implement reformatting initiatives, or other activities related to preservation.
        4. Bibliographic control: imposing or deriving an organizational structure to provide access to information resources (in any format) for effective retrieval. Includes: original cataloging, cataloging with copy, online authority control, maintenance of circulation systems, preparation of in-house indexes or finding guides to materials.
        5. Reference service: assisting users in the discovery, access, and utilization of information resources. Includes performance of regularly scheduled reference service, provision of computer-based services, cooperative reference referral, preparation of guides and handouts.
        6. User education: creating and providing print or electronic user guides, maps, signs, tours; class presentations including participation in library-wide programs, preparation of exhibits highlighting collections or services, provision of aids for using the online catalog, and other teaching activities provided to students and faculty on campus, as well as other local and regional organizations.
        7. Faculty liaison: regular contact with faculty and staff, both within the library and through other campus departments.
          Systems activities: software development, implementation and monitoring of online systems (including online catalog, journal article databases, locally generated online databases, etc.), development and maintenance of local area and wide area networks and Web servers, liaison with programmers, statewide systems governance organizations, and other systems organizations on campus.

    Management activities:

      1. Personnel: hiring and supervision (staff, librarians, and graduate assistants), supervision of student workers or volunteers, job-related staff training, workshops or lectures presented to library faculty
      2. Operations: Strategic planning; statistical reporting; evaluation of service; unit promotional and development activities; faculty liaison
      3. Budgetary: management of library materials budgets, coordination of acquisition funds, budgetary reports; management of library operational budgets, requests for grants and other funding, fiscal accountability, budgetary reports.
      4. Descriptive Data: Instruction.
        Provide information for undergraduate and graduate courses, both on and off campus, since last promotion. For each semester under review, provide a list of courses taught and the number of students enrolled in the course.
      5. Supervision of Graduate Student Research.
      6. Other Contributions to Instructional Programs.
        Significant instructional contributions of other sorts, e.g. through development of course materials used by other instructors, through professional training provided to Graduate Assistants, and through extensive independent study or informal interactions with students.
  • Evaluation of Librarianship and Instruction.
    1. Student ICES Course Evaluation Questionnaires.If applicable.
    2. Candidate’s Report and Self-Review of Activities in the Area of Librarianship.
      The candidate must provide a personal statement of their philosophy of librarianship, methods, strengths, problems, goals, and other material in a manner that will present colleagues with a context for interpreting other evaluative information.

Departmental Evaluation of Librarianship.
A narrative statement evaluating the candidates librarianship, including quotes or excerpts from the Peer Review Committee report and reference letters.

  • Service (Public, Professional/Disciplinary, and University)
    1. Summary of Service
      1. Public Service
      2. Service to Disciplinary and Professional Societies or Associations
      3. University/Campus Service
    2. Evaluation of Service(Author of evaluation: .)
      1. Public Service
      2. Service to Disciplinary and Professional Societies or Associations
      3. University/Campus Service
  • Research
    1. Candidate’s Statement of Research Goals and Accomplishments
      (Three pages or less.)
    2. Departmental Evaluation of Research Accomplishments
      (with emphasis on one or two publications or creative works)
      (Author of evaluation: .)
    3. Departmental Evaluation of Future Potential
      (Author of evaluation: .)
  • External Evaluations
    1. Sample Letter(s) to External Evaluators
    2. Qualifications of the External Evaluators
    3. Letters from External Evaluators
  • Special Comments by the Executive Officer


Appendix 2 Internal and External referees

Internal referees:

  • Dean of College served
  • Head of Department served
  • Chair or member of Library Committee
  • Users of the library
  • Faculty served
  • * Librarians from non-peer institutions
  • * Librarians from other divisions

External referees:

  • Colleagues (librarians) at peer institutions
  • Chair of committee in ALA, SLA, MLA, or other professional organization on which candidate has served
  • Other professional organization officers, etc.
  • NOT APPROPRIATE: co-authors or individuals with whom the candidate formerly worked

Lists of external referees should be accompanied by a short statement why this individual is qualified to serve. Curriculum vitae or lists of publications may
accompany these lists.
* For units without a defined constituency

Appendix 3 Possible areas of review to discuss with referees

Peer Review Committees gather information relating to librarianship with individuals within the Library and UIUC non-library faculty.
Areas of evaluation: Solicit Evaluative Comments from:

  1. Reference service and user education: Library users; unit head or division (Including reference, computer-based services, coordinator; departmental faculty and instruction, excluding formal courses)
  2. Selection and Preservation: (Selection of books, journals, and other materials: Library users, unit head or division members; Preservation: collection coordinator, departmental faculty, departmental library committee chair; collection development chair
  3. Management and budgetary activities: Unit head or division coordinator; executive officer(s) of academic department(s) or college; departmental library committee chair
  4. Intellectual/ Bibliographic control: Unit head or division coordinator; individuals with cataloging responsibilities
  5. Systems activities: Unit head or division coordinator, systems librarian, building network administrator
  6. Special projects and/or other assignments: Unit head or division coordinator, other appropriate individuals
  7. Library/University service: Unit head or division coordinator, committee chair or members

Appendix 4 Guidelines for Interviewing Internal Referees

During these scheduled interviews, the Peer Review Committee is expected to:

  1. state that the purpose of the interview is to assess candidate’s progress towards research, service and librarianship during the probationary period. THIS IS NOT TENURE REVIEW.
  2. review procedures and discuss the significance of formal evaluation
  3. state that this conversation is confidential
  4. identify that this will be an oral evaluation only, but extensive, adequate typed notes will be retained for files
  5. review the goals and objectives of the candidates job incorporating the following factors:
    • professional competency and creativity
    • overall relationship with library personnel and clientele and/or liaison department faculty and students
    • commitment to the library profession
    • communication skills
    • strengths and weaknesses
  6. assess referee’s willingness to be placed on a list of referees to be contacted at promotion time.

(If significant reservations are expressed about any area of job performance, Peer Review Committee members should strongly urge that the appropriate library administrator address these issues with the candidate explicitly, providing specific suggestions as to how performance might be improved.)

Appendix 5

NOTE:  This letter is to be issued by the University Librarian’s Office, not by members of PRC.

An email message to external evaluators asking whether they would be willing to serve as external evaluators should be sent by members of the PRC.  This will be followed by an official letter from the University Librarian’s Office to those willing to serve as external reviewers.
Sample email request to external referees regarding candidate’s research and scholarship in 3Y and beyond:

Dear Prof. Appletree:

I am on the Peer Review Committee (a review committee) for Professor Albert Einstein that will be undertaking a formal review of his progress in the third year of his probationary period. The procedures at the University of Illinois require formal external evaluations of tenure-track faculty at intermediate points in their career. This evaluation is being conducted to inform the candidate and the University of strengths and weaknesses that may have an impact on the future tenure decision.

If you agree to provide an evaluation, our University Librarian’s office will send you Professor Einstein’s vita, as well as a recent offprint(s) for your convenience.  It would be most helpful if you would refer to specific items in your assessment.

The Peer Review Committee would be grateful for your prompt response to this request which should be addressed to me. Our deadline for receipt of your evaluation (by fax, by e-mail, or letter) if you agree to provide an assessment is ———. Since we realize that your thoughtful review and evaluation of our colleague will require careful consideration, if you are UNABLE to do so at this time, would you please advise me immediately?

The policy of the University of Illinois is to hold in confidence all letters of evaluation from persons outside the institution. Only the committees and administrative officers directly responsible for the decision of concern here will have access to your letter. It will not be provided to the person on whom you comment unless we are compelled by law to do so.


Appendix 6

Possible questions for use by Peer Review Committee when interviewing internal referees:
Reference and Information Service

  1. When at work, is the librarian available to assist users?
  2. Is the librarian approachable to users?
  3. How would you rate your level of satisfaction in finding the information you need through this person?
  4. Does the librarian show initiative in offering professional help?
  5. In your opinion, what is the librarian’s level of knowledge in respect to various information sources relating to your field of expertise?
  6. Does the librarian show innovative approaches to the provision of service?
  7. Have you attended any instructional sessions conducted by this librarian? If yes, how would you rate the value of the same?
  8. Generally speaking, how would you rate the librarian’s communication skills?
  9. What is your overall opinion as the librarian’s professional competency in the area of reference service?

Collection Development

  1. In your opinion, does the librarian keep abreast of research and current developments in your field of expertise?
  2. Are you satisfied that the librarian is doing everything possible to identify and acquire materials published in your field of expertise?
  3. Does the librarian respond to faculty/user suggestions regarding materials for acquisition?
  4. In the event of the library not being able to acquire requested material, are you satisfied with the librarian’s explanation or suggestion for an alternative means of acquiring the same material?
  5. In your opinion, is the librarian helpful to users in regard to specific inquiries (such as following up on book orders already placed, making inquiries concerning items in binding, etc.)?
  6. Does the library acquire recently published materials in your area of expertise in a timely manner?
  7. Allowing for the fact that library budgets and collection development policies do not usually permit comprehensive acquisition in any single are, do you consider that the librarian is making appropriate choices of items to purchase out of the entire range of material published in your field of expertise?
  8. What is your overall impression of the librarian’s performance in respect to building the collection generally?

Management and Administration

  1. In your opinion, does the librarian strive to meet the research and teaching needs of the departmental clientele served?
  2. Is the general atmosphere of the library “user friendly?”
  3. How often do you use the library?
  4. Is the librarian open to dialogue? Does the librarian effectively communicate the library’s policies and services to users?
  5. What, in your opinion, are the positive aspects of the librarian’s performance?
  6. Do you perceive any problem areas in the way in which the librarian performs assigned duties? If so, please describe:
  7. Does the librarian handle the budget effectively?
  8. Does the librarian display effective skills in time management and delegation of responsibilities?
  9. Does the librarian encourage the professional development of colleagues and staff?

Bibliographic Control
What are your observations and perceptions as to the librarian’s job performance in respect to:

  1. Accuracy
  2. Productivity
  3. Knowledge of cataloging theory and practice
  4. Keeping abreast of changes in rules and conventions
  5. Development and utilization, as appropriate, of non-traditional approaches.

Appendix 7: Archival Files

Archival files should be maintained by members of the Peer Review Committee for the probationary period only and should contain:

  • all documents the candidate submits to the Peer Review Committee, including “Outline for Promotion Dossier”
  • all previous Peer Review Committee reports
  • other notes, names of internal and external references, and any other information gathered by the Peer Review Committee

Upon completion of the probationary term or termination of employment at the university, these files will be transferred to the University Librarian’s office.

Appendix 8

Instructions to candidates responding to the Peer Review Committee Report

  1. If you are concerned with written comments made by your Peer Review Committee in your annual evaluation, please contact the members of your Peer Review Committee to arrange a meeting to clarify any misunderstandings or misconceptions. Conversely, if you are pleased with your report, this is an appropriate vehicle for so stating.
  2. After meeting with your Peer Review Committee, if you feel that your accomplishments in the area/s of Librarianship, Service and/or Research and Publication, have not been represented accurately, please respond to your Peer Review Committee with a written clarification. Your response should take into account any extenuating circumstances not recognized in the Peer Review Committee report such as administrative hardships in your unit and personality conflicts within the unit, etc.

Appendix 9

Special Problems
If the Peer Review Committee has concerns that there is a serious impediment to achieving tenure which is deemed to be beyond the control of the candidate (whether it be for administrative reasons, personnel issues, etc.), the Committee may contact the Chair of FRC (in written form).
The Chair of FRC may convene the Committee to determine the appropriate course of action.

The untenured faculty member may contact the Chair of FRC to alert the Committee of a potential obstacle to achieving tenure. FRC will seek consultation, if appropriate with the University Librarian or his/her designated representative.