Replaces: http://www.indiana.edu/~libpers/peerreview.pdf and
http://www.indiana.edu/~libblfc/20012002/peerreview/pcannualmeritrev.html

Approved by BLFC: 3/14/03 and with revisions on 4/2/03. Approved by vote of library faculty, 5/7/2003.

I. General Principles

A. Shared Values

• Annual merit reviews should support and encourage continual improvement for all librarians throughout their careers at IU.
• Annual merit salary increments should recognize individual achievements for that year.
• Peer and supervisory evaluations are useful for librarians’ professional growth.
• Peer and supervisory input into annual salary decisions adds credibility and a sense of fairness to the process.
• The process for peer review evaluation must ensure that:
  • Contributions in the three areas of a librarian’s responsibility (Performance, Professional Development, and Service) form the basis for annual merit ratings.
  • The Performance category remains the primary factor in establishing annual merit ratings for librarians.
  • Contributions to organizational and departmental goals are recognized and rewarded.
  • Librarians’ academic freedom is preserved.

B. Purpose

• Make recommendations to the University Dean of University Libraries on the merit portion of the annual salary distribution to individual librarians.

C. Scope

All tenured and tenure-track librarians on the regular IUB Libraries' budget are included in this peer review process with the following exceptions:

• Dean and Associate Dean(s),
• Librarians who are tenured and tenure-track who were appointed after July 1 of the evaluation year,
• Librarians for whom a salary recommendation is irrelevant (e.g., they are resigning or retiring).

Librarians not included in this review according to the exceptions above are eligible for merit increases. The recommendation for this increase will be made to the Dean by their supervisors.

Librarians on budgets not administered by the University Dean of University Libraries may voluntarily participate in the peer review process. Such librarians will be polled by the BLFC Secretary in September of each year. Those who wish to participate will also be included in the committee selection process.

D. Documentation

All librarians within the scope of the review must turn in their annual reviews/reports (without supervisors' comments or answers written in response to supervisors' comments) and copies of their position descriptions to the Peer Committee. Librarians have the option to submit additional documentation. The Peer Committee may also request additional documentation.

E. Criteria for review

The merit evaluation will focus on the traditional areas of a librarian's responsibility (Performance, Professional Development/Research/Creativity, and Service), as well as standards of professional conduct appropriate to the librarian, including the fundamental responsibilities set out in the Code of Academic Ethics. The Peer Committee will focus on the librarian's position description in defining the context for judging the accomplishments and the nature of the contributions. The judgment will be on the quality of the accomplishments.

The annual merit review criteria are based on the Criteria for Librarian Promotions (See: Library Faculty Handbook), but differ because the merit evaluation covers one year only. The merit criteria recognize different expectations for assistant and associate/full librarians.

Performance

The Peer Committee will consider the following in assessing the librarian's performance:

• Contribution to the work of the position (e.g., the volume of work, the quality of work, innovation, evidence of managerial competence),
• Contribution to the department's goals and to library-wide goals.

In order to achieve a Level II rating in Performance, the following standard must be met:

Assistant librarians: good, meets the requirements of operational standards
Associate/Full librarians: excellent, exceeding the requirements of operational standards.

Professional Development/Research/Creativity

The Peer Committee will consider the following in assessing the librarian's professional development:

• Quality of the contributions,
• Effect on the development of the individual, primarily as a librarian, but also as a member of the university community.

In order to achieve a Level II rating in Professional Development, the following standard must be met:

Assistant librarians: promising beginning
Associate/Full librarians: satisfactory, demonstrating responsiveness to the demands of the profession.

Service

The Peer Committee will consider the following in assessing the librarian's service:

• Quality of the contributions and the effectiveness with which the service is performed,
• Relation to the general welfare of the University and/or the profession,
• Effect on the development of the individual primarily as a librarian, but also as a member of the university community.

In order to achieve a Level II rating in service the following standard must be met:

Assistant librarians: promising beginning
Associate/Full librarians: satisfactory, reflecting favorably on the University and the Libraries.

II. Peer Committee for Annual Merit Review

BLFC will appoint a Peer Committee of four librarians to review the documentation presented by librarians. Once a librarian serves on the Peer Committee, that librarian may not serve again for five years. Librarians included in the review process, plus those librarians on budgets not administered by the University Dean of University Libraries who have chosen to participate, are eligible to be appointed to the Peer Committee. The committee will establish procedures for excusing members from deliberations due to possible conflicts of interest (e.g., their own evaluation, a spouse, etc.) or other unavoidable circumstances.

Selection of the Peer Committee will be by lottery. Prior to November 1 each year, the BLFC secretary will randomly select the names of 4 librarians from those eligible for membership on the Peer Committee. Those agreeing to serve will be appointed by BLFC for a one-year term.

III. Peer Committee Procedures and Merit Ranking

In November, the BLFC Secretary will call the first meeting of the Peer Committee and will preside over the meeting until such time as a chair is selected by the Peer Committee. Using the criteria listed above, the Peer Committee will evaluate each librarian in all three areas of the annual review/report using the following ratings. After assigning a rating to each area, the Peer Committee will assign each librarian an overall rating based on the following guidelines:

Overall Merit Ratings:

Level I: Does not meet normal and expected standards of excellence for [year]

Conditions resulting in this overall rating:

• Level I in Performance, even if a Level II or above has been achieved in both of the other categories

OR

• Level I in BOTH Professional Development AND Service, even if a Level II or above in Performance has been achieved.

The Peer Committee will write brief justifications for each Level I overall rating.

Level II: “Excellent” (meets or exceeds normal and expected standards of excellence for [year])

Minimum requirements:

• Level II in Performance

• Level II in EITHER Professional Development OR Service.

In recognition of the natural ebb and flow of involvement in Professional Development and Service over a career, librarians who do not meet expectations in ONE of these categories in any given year are eligible for a Level II rating. However, the Peer Committee should inform such librarians that their accomplishments in the category that was rated Level I do not meet expectations.

Level III: “Outstanding” (deserving of special recognition for outstanding accomplishments for [year])

Minimum requirements:

• Level III in Performance (normally)*

AND

• Level III in EITHER Professional Development OR Service (with nothing less than a level II in either of these two categories).

* There could be an exceptional case where a librarian with a level II in Performance and outstanding accomplishments in other areas would be rated Level III overall.

The number of Level III ratings given by the Peer Committee will vary according to the accomplishments of the librarians each year. The Peer Committee is strongly advised to keep the number of Level III ratings small in order to validate the excellence of Level II librarians and still have special significance for Level III librarians. The Peer Committee will write brief justifications for each Level III overall rating.

The Peer Committee members will treat as confidential all information acquired during consideration of an individual's merit category.

IV. Communicating the Results of the Peer Review Process

The Peer Committee will prepare a brief statement about each librarian reviewed and forward ratings and statements (including justifications for overall Level I and Level III ratings) to the Libraries Human Resources Department, which will send them to the Dean, to each librarian, and the librarian’s supervisor as soon as they are completed. The Libraries Human Resources Department will place the ratings and comments in the librarian’s personnel file.

Librarians who wish to disagree with or add a response to the Peer Committee's evaluation are to address the response to the Dean by April 20. In accordance with the BFC Annual Merit Evaluation Policy no. 4, the merit category assigned to each librarian by the Peer Committee will be included in the librarian's annual salary letter from the Dean. For librarians on budgets not administered by the University Dean of University Libraries who have chosen to participate in the peer review process, the Dean will communicate the results of the peer review to the appropriate administrators and/or supervisors.

V. Calendar

September: BLFC Secretary polls librarians on budgets not administered by Dean of University Libraries to see if they choose to participate in Peer Review Process

October: Peer Committee selected by lottery and appointed by BLFC

November: Peer Committee meets and selects Chair

November: Annual Review/Report forms distributed

March 1: All librarians to be reviewed submit documentation to the Chair of the Peer Committee, c/o Library Human Resources Office, by this date

March 1: Peer Committee begins reviewing documentation

March 31: Peer Committee submits recommendations to the Dean. Libraries Human Resources Department sends each librarian and supervisor the rating and comments from the Peer Committee

April 20: Responses to the Peer Committee ratings from individual librarians due to the Dean

VI. Final Formalities

Report from the Dean: The Peer Committee will request from the Dean a report concerning the actual distribution of salary increases vis-a-vis the Peer Committee's recommendations and supervisor's recommendations, e.g.:

• How many recommendations were followed?
• How many were not followed?
• How many librarians were rated differently for merit increments than as recommended by the Peer Committee?
• How many instances were in agreement with the rating by the supervisor?

The Peer Committee will report to the library faculty on its work. The Peer Committee's files will be kept in the Library Human Resources Office.

URL:http://www.indiana.edu/~libweb/peerreviewrevised.html
Comments: libweb@www.indiana.edu
Copyright 2002, The Trustees of Indiana University