Yale University Library
Procedural Guidelines For Promotion Review
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
Advice and CounselConfidentiality
II. Summary of Responsibilities
CandidateSupervisor
Department Head
Associate University Librarian
Promotion Review Committee
Director of Library Human Relations
University Librarian
III. Documentation
Required DocumentsPromotion Review Request Form
Annual Performance Reviews
Self-evaluation of Performance
Curriculum Vita or Resume
Department Head's Review
List of Potential Evaluators
Recommended Documents
Copies of Published Works
Copies of Internal Reports
Other Relevant Documents
Descriptions of Former Positions
IV. Procedures and Instructions for Candidates
Self-evaluation of PerformanceList of Potential Evaluators
Completion of the Promotion Review Dossier
V. Procedures and Instructons for Department Heads and Supervisors
Department Head's ReviewList of Potential Evaluators
I. INTRODUCTION
These guidelines describe the procedures to be followed in the Promotion Review Program for Librarians. Librarians under review should read and follow these guidelines. It is equally important for the individual's supervisor, department head, Associate University Librarian, and the members of the Promotion Review Committee to be thoroughly familiar with these procedural guidelines. All parties should also review the "Yale University Library Professional Standards & Promotion Review" document.
Advice and Counsel
The candidate's supervisor, department head, and Associate University Librarian are centrally involved in the review process for all promotions to Librarian II, III, IV, or V. Each year Library Human Resources will conduct a mandatory orientation for supervisors whose staffs include candidates for promotion to the ranks of Librarian II and/or Librarian III.
In addition to annual performance reviews with their supervisor, librarians should consult with their department head (for department heads or curators, with an Associate University Librarian) to identify areas for improving their performance, to understand the promotion review schedule, and to receive guidance in documenting their case for promotion. This consultation should take place well in advance of the actual promotion review to allow time for any corrective action by the candidate. Candidates or their department heads should consult with Library Human Resources to determine eligibility for promotion. Library Human Resources will be sure that eligibility towards promotion that is accrued at other institutions is clearly stated in the candidate's documentation.
Confidentiality
It is the policy of the Yale University Library to maintain strict confidentiality regarding access to all letters of evaluation solicited in the promotion review process. Only the members of the Promotion Review Committee who are reviewing the candidate's request for promotion and others directly involved in the promotion consideration shall have access to these letters. Candidates will not have access to these letters of evaluation. To encourage evaluators to be candid in their assessment of candidates, this policy statement is included in the letters sent to solicit these evaluations. Candidates will have access to the recommendation prepared by their department head.
II. SUMMARY OF RESPONSIBILITIES
A. Candidate
As described in the document, "Yale University Library Professional Standards & Promotion Review" librarians are expected to "develop professionally, and to make significant contributions to the work of the library and the profession." Librarians under consideration for promotion are responsible for gathering and submitting all documentation (except confidential letters of evaluation) for their promotion review dossiers. The necessary documentation and procedures for gathering it are described in detail below.
B. Supervisor
A librarian's immediate supervisor is responsible for guiding the individual's growth and development as a librarian and for providing on-going, specific feedback on performance. In annual written performance reviews, supervisors should address a librarian's performance in all three of the areas described in "Yale University Library Professional Standards & Promotion Review." The supervisor will consult with the department head and, as appropriate, with the Associate University Librarian. The supervisor also will provide guidance and support to librarians as they prepare their promotion review dossier.
C. Department Head
The department head plays a critical role in the development of the Yale librarian. In concert with the immediate supervisor, the department head is responsible for taking a direct and active interest in the performance, growth, and development of librarians in his or her department. The department head will prepare the Department Head's Review as part of the promotion review process. This review will build on the annual performance evaluations written by the supervisor and must address all three of the areas described in "Yale University Library Professional Standards & Promotion Review." This thorough evaluation of performance shall include the department head's written recommendation regarding promotion. The department head also assists the candidate in preparing a list of suggested evaluators.
D. Associate University Librarian
The Associate University Librarian consults with the department head and immediate supervisor as required and is consulted by the University Librarian in all final decisions.
E. Promotion Review Committee
The Promotion Review Committee evaluates the promotion review files of candidates for promotion; carefully considers the case for promotion, and makes a recommendation for action on the case to the University Librarian.
F. Director of Library Human Resources
The Director of Library Human Resources maintains a permanent file of all annual performance reviews as well as the promotion review files of candidates; annually prepares a list of those librarians eligible for promotion to each rank; answers candidates' questions about eligibility for promotion; assists the Promotion Review Committee as required; advises and assists librarians, supervisors, and department heads as appropriate; and provides staff support to the University Librarian as required.
G. University Librarian
The University Librarian (or, in the case of candidates from the Law Library, the Law Librarian) the makes the final decision on all promotion requests upon review of the documentation submitted; receives the recommendations of the department heads and the Promotion Review Committee; consults with other library administrators as appropriate; and notifies the candidate, the department head, the Associate University Librarian and the Promotion Review Committee of the final decision.
III. DOCUMENTATION
It is essential that promotion review dossiers include all the documents that are relevant to a candidate's review, including any document that the candidate, supervisor, or department head singles out for attention in their statements. Any document that is not available should be identified as such with a brief explanation why it is unavailable. Candidates may obtain copies of their annual performance reviews from Library Human Resources. (N.B. Library Human Resources does not automatically add performance reviews to candidate's dossiers.)
Required Documents:
A. Promotion Review Request Form
B. Copies of the candidate's annual performance reviews and his or her goals and objectives statements for the period since initial appointment or promotion to current rank
C. Candidate's self-evaluation of performance (described in detail below).
D. A curriculum vita or resume
E. Statement from the candidate's department head. (The department head's review is described in detail below. Candidates will receive a copy of the evaluation to submit in their dossier).
F. List of suggested professional evaluators. - For candidates applying for promotion to rank of Librarian III or above, the University Librarian will solicit confidential letters of evaluation of the candidate's performance and professional contributions. In writing to potential evaluators, the University Librarian will state that the Library is seeking an objective evaluation and that the evaluation is not meant to serve as a recommendation. The University Librarian may solicit such letters from anyone who is thought to be familiar with the candidate's work. Candidates for rank of Librarian III or higher should provide a list of suggested evaluators. Candidates may inform a potential evaluator that his/her name has been submitted to the University Librarian. Under no circumstances may candidates solicit their own letters of evaluation.
Recommended documents:
Candidates should include any additional documents that will allow the Promotion Review Committee to fully understand and assess their professional performance and achievements. Such documents include:
G. Copies of published books, articles, reviews (not just the citations). These will be returned to the candidate at the end of the review process
H. Copies of in-house reports to which the candidate contributed along with an explanation of the context in which the reports were generated and of their impact on library or University operations.
I. Other relevant documentation (e.g. grant proposals, course syllabi, outlines for workshops or seminars conducted). Be certain to include documents that will help the Promotion Review Committee and others understand and assess the professional impact of service on library, University or professional committees.
J. Former position description to give credit for experience comparable to current position
IV. PROCEDURES AND INSTRUCTIONS FOR CANDIDATES
A. Self-evaluation of Performance
The candidate will prepare a statement that describes his or her accomplishments in each of the three general categories described in "Yale University Library Professional Standards & Promotion Review." Candidates are encouraged to refer to the specific criteria listed in each category. The statement should address the ways in which the candidate has met the requirements for the rank being sought. The report should focus on the period since appointment to present rank, but candidates may include earlier achievements if their inclusion provides a better picture of their development and career accomplishments. This self-evaluation shall be no longer than 3,000 words.
Competence in Position Responsibilities
Discuss accomplishments in each area of responsibility. Describe the performance objectives set since appointment to current rank and progress toward achieving them.. Assess the value of these contributions to the library and other areas of the University as appropriate.
Professional Contributions to the Library and University
Describe in detail each activity and the nature of participation, including dates. Assess the impact of the work on the library and University. Provide sufficient accompanying documentation to allow the Promotion Review Committee to understand and assess the work and its impact.)
Professional Growth and Contributions
Describe conferences, workshops, projects, courses of study, seminars, etc. attended or conducted. Describe their significance and the nature of participation. Provide sufficient accompanying documentation to allow the Promotion Review Committee to understand and assess the activities and their professional import.
Conclusion
Note any additional factors that may help the supervisor, department head, Associate University Librarian, Promotion Review Committee, or University Librarian arrive at an objective assessment of performance. Please be sure to describe any relevant prior experience to be considered when determining eligibility for promotion. Provide a summary, noting those areas considered most important in weighing the evidence presented.
Candidates should submit a copy of their completed self-evaluation of performance to their immediate supervisor who will send it to the department head. The department head, in close consultation with the immediate supervisor will prepare an evaluation. The department head will discuss the evaluation and his or her recommendation on promotion with the candidate. The candidate will see the department head's evaluation and may comment on it, if desired. Candidates will sign the evaluation to record that they have reviewed it. They will receive a copy to submit with their dossier.
B. List of suggested evaluators
Candidates for promotion to the rank of Librarian III or higher, in consultation with their department head, prepare a list of individuals from whom the University Librarian might solicit a letter of evaluation. The persons suggested must be in a position to comment on a candidate's accomplishments in the areas of "Professional Contributions to the Library and University" or "Professional Growth and Contributions". Ordinarily, three to eight names will be sufficient. Include the person's title, institutional affiliation, address, and a brief statement (no more than three sentences) describing this person's special qualifications as an evaluator. The University Librarian may solicit letters of evaluation from others familiar with a candidate's work. Under no circumstances may candidates solicit their own letters of evaluation. However, candidates may contact potential evaluators to let them know that they may be asked to write a letter of evaluation.
C. Completion of the Promotion Review Dossier
Review the Promotion Review Request Form list of documents to assure that the dossier is complete. Sign the form and submit it with all supporting documentation to Library Human Resources where it will be kept as a confidential file for review by the University Librarian and the members of the Promotion Review Committee. The department head or the Associate University Librarian may also have access to this file when needed. The candidate may review all documents in the file except confidential letters of evaluation and the report of the Promotion Review Committee. The Director of Library Human Resources is responsible for the maintenance of and access to the file.
V. PROCEDURES AND INSTRUCTIONS FOR DEPARTMENT HEADS AND SUPERVISORS
The role of supervisors and department heads in the promotion review process is critical. They must thoroughly evaluate the work of each candidate in their department and make an appropriate written recommendation based on the librarian's performance in relation to the criteria described in the document, "Yale University Library Professional Standards & Promotion Review."
A. Department head's review of performance
The department head, in close consultation with the candidate's immediate supervisor, is responsible for a thorough evaluation of the candidate's performance for the period of the review. In preparing for the evaluation, department heads should review a candidate's assigned responsibilities and clarify their understanding of these duties with the candidate and immediate supervisor as necessary. The department head may also consult the Associate University Librarian to describe the candidate's performance as objectively as possible.
After reviewing the candidate's self-evaluation of performance and other available documents, complete an evaluation that thoroughly addresses the three areas of performance described in "Yale University Library Professional Standards & Promotion Review."
Competence in position responsibilities
Thoroughly evaluate the candidate's job performance in each area of responsibility. Assess progress made toward achievement of the performance objectives set for the period of this review. Comment on the contributions made to the work of the department and the library and other areas as appropriate.
Professional contribution to the library and the University
Describe the candidate's participation in library and University affairs and assess his or her performance and particular contributions. Evaluate the value of these activities to the work of your department, the library and other areas as appropriate.
Professional growth and contributions
Describe the candidate's participation in professional activities and assess the value his or her performance and contributions. Pay particular attention to activities that have contributed to the profession or to the academic community.
Conclusion
Describe any other factors relevant for consideration in this review. Summarize your assessment of the candidate's performance, indicating your views on the areas that are most important in weighing the evidence that you have presented. Conclude with a recommendation for a) promoting the candidate, b) delaying the consideration of the candidate, or c) denying the candidate's request for promotion. The evaluation should be about two pages long.
Review the evaluation and recommendation with the candidate. Permit the candidate, if he or she desires, to comment on the evaluation. Copy the evaluation and any comments. Date and sign each copy. Have the candidate do the same. Give one copy to the candidate to submit as part of their dossier. Retain a copy for the library's files.
B. Assistance in preparation of list of evaluators
It is the department head's responsibility to aid the candidate in preparing a list of suggested evaluators. This list should include the names of individuals who are familiar with a particular aspect of the candidate's performance or who are knowledgeable about his of her accomplishments. As a whole, the list should include the names of a variety of individuals whose evaluations in total will serve to enhance the overall view of the librarian's performance.