The University of Kansas, like most other research universities in the United States, has historically given greatest emphasis in the evaluation of Library Faculty to the quality of their performance in librarianship. This continues to be the case at KU. The KU Libraries expect that the expertise Library Faculty have developed through their professional performance and intellectual curiosity both can and should be shared with the profession at large in the form of significant service and an appropriate program of scholarship, both of which are subject to review by their professional peers.

The Promotion and Tenure Procedures for the Faculty of The University of Kansas Libraries, last approved by the Library Faculty Assembly in December 2016, outlines the promotion and tenure standards for tenure-track and tenured Library Faculty and Unclassified Academic Staff (hereafter referred to as “Library Faculty” or “Library Faculty member”) in the areas of professional performance, research/scholarly activities, and service. Library Faculty are evaluated annually based on these standards, following the policies and procedures for evaluation and development outlined in this Plan.

STATEMENT OF PERFORMANCE EXPECTATIONS

Expectations are similar for Library Faculty, although the Libraries recognize that the specific contributions of Library Faculty to the Libraries' mission will differ depending on career stage and rank. The supervisor’s in-depth understanding of his/her supervisee’s performance informs the evaluation, particularly given the wide range of Library Faculty members’ responsibilities and unique work conditions.

1. Unit expectations

Library Faculty duties can be varied, and can change, due to the changing nature of the environment in which they work. As information specialists, Library Faculty are involved in the development and design of library resources, collections, and information systems; information management and organization; instructional and research consultation and support services; and administration and planning. The evaluation of a Library Faculty member’s professional performance usually replaces the evaluation of teaching effectiveness used for non-librarian faculty. In some special cases, a Library Faculty member may teach a for-credit class and are evaluated for their teaching effectiveness accordingly, either as part of their professional performance (if the instruction is not part of their position description) or as part of their teaching portfolio, if their position description includes for-credit instruction. While no single definition or standard of excellence can adequately address all aspects of librarianship, effective Library Faculty members need to demonstrate competence, currency, creativity, and initiative. The quality of professional performance and competence in carrying out one’s assigned responsibilities are the focal points for evaluation of professional performance.

Professional Performance in Librarianship

Library Faculty hold 12-month appointments. The standard annual assignment for professional performance typically comprises 70 to 90 percent of a Library Faculty member’s assignment. It is expected that Library Faculty will fulfill their professional duties at a high level of effectiveness resulting in significant accomplishments.

The following examples illustrate effective professional performance:

Understands the needs of library users in a research university in the assigned areas of responsibility and specialization. Within his/her level of professional knowledgeand understanding, each Library Faculty member reaches beyond their assignment to participate in and contribute to discussion and decision-making on a broad and ever-expanding range of library and related academic issues and, in some cases, beyond traditional roles and initiatives in the fields of library and information science.

Keeps abreast of current developments in the field of library and information science and applies this knowledge to identify and address the most complex issues which arise in the Libraries. Monitors developments in related professional fields or academic disciplines as appropriate.

Works consistently with a high degree of initiative and independence to apply the intellectual bases of library and information science, in addition to other relevant knowledge (e.g., in a discipline). Also works at a high degree of initiative and independence to identify and resolve complex issues associated with the performance of responsibilities as Library Faculty. Offers substantial, knowledgeable guidance to colleagues to identify and resolve issues in related areas of specialization.

Makes sound decisions within the full range of responsibilities that make up the assignment, within a broader understanding of the assignments of colleagues in related areas of the library. Applies skills, knowledge and abilities to the broad range of challenging issues that face the profession and produces results of predictably high quality. Examples include accurate analysis of complex materials to build and provide access to library and other information resources; successful interactions with users resulting in the provision of high quality information services; demonstrated high standards of evaluation of library and other information resources for acquisition or retention; and information systems creation and management.

Operates with a high degree of success in a complex organization and makes significant intellectual contributions to the enterprise. Cooperates with colleagues in developing and maintaining the Libraries’ collections, other information resources, and bibliographic and similar systems that promote intellectual access to them.

Research and Scholarly Activities

Although Library Faculty hold 12-month appointments, they are expected to engage in research/scholarly activities and to pursue a program of scholarship yielding high quality results, including those subject to peer assessment. The standard annual assignment for research/scholarly activities typically comprises 5 to 20 percent of a Library Faculty member’s assignment. The percentages may be adjusted beyond the typical ranges described below in Section 3 upon final approval by the Dean. The wide range of Library Faculty assignments at KU and the demands of 12-month appointments lead to variation in the type and amount of scholarly or creative activities in which they engage. It is expected that the outcomes of these activities will be disseminated and subject to critical peer evaluation. In this way, Library Faculty will contribute to enhancing the profession of librarianship or a related area or a specialized subject area in which they conduct research/scholarly activities.

Service

Library Faculty members make distinctive professional service contributions to the KU Libraries, to the University of Kansas, and/or to librarianship and related fields. They also assume leadership roles in service beyond that given to the KU Libraries. A strong service profile is highly valued by Library Faculty; therefore, they are expected to demonstrate a consistent record of service beyond their assigned library responsibilities, with contributions to KU Libraries, to the University, and to professional organizations.

Customary Differential Allocation of Effort

Professional Performance	70 - 90%
Service	*5 - 15%
Research/scholarly activities	*5 - 20%
Total	100%

* Service and research/scholarly activities percentages may not ordinarily be less than 5% each and will each generally total between 10% and 20% of the weighting of the performance evaluation.

2. Standards for Acceptable Performance for Library Faculty

The Libraries are committed to assisting all Library Faculty members to reach their full potential in professional performance, research/scholarly activities, and service (see Faculty Development Initiatives in Section 7). Statements in this section address expectations for Library Faculty.

Minimum Standards for Professional Performance of Library Faculty

The supervisor of a Library Faculty member is responsible for assessing the professional performance of the Library Faculty member in accordance with procedures, standards, and criteria developed by Library Faculty. Given the nature and diversity of Library Faculty professional assignments, a specific list of professional performance standards is not possible; neither is it possible to list specific examples of required documentation to support the standard being met. Nonetheless, where appropriate, the Library Faculty member will provide documentation.

Library Faculty professional responsibilities are individually differentiated and it is impossible to enumerate all possible minimum standards of performance. However, broad demonstrations of the following allow supervisors and administrators in the Libraries to mark accomplishments and demonstrate that Library Faculty meet the minimum standards of professional performance. At minimum Library Faculty will:

• Demonstrate ongoing progress in understanding the needs of library users in a research university in the assigned areas of responsibility and specialization.
• Participate in and contribute to discussion and decision-making on a broad range of library and related academic issues—beyond the assignment.
• Show progress in keeping abreast of current developments in the field of library and information science and apply this information in identifying and addressing the complex issues that arise in the Libraries.
• Monitor developments in related professional fields or academic disciplines as appropriate.
• Work consistently with initiative and independence to apply the intellectual bases of library and information science, in addition to other relevant knowledge (e.g., in a discipline), to the identification and resolution of complex issues associated with the performance of the Library Faculty member’s responsibilities. Offer guidance to colleagues to identify and resolve issues in related areas of specialization.
• Demonstrate the ability to make sound decisions within the full range of responsibilities that make up the assignment, within a broader understanding of the assignments of colleagues in related areas of the Libraries.
• Apply skills, knowledge, and abilities to responsibilities that range from the traditional services of acquiring, accessing, and preserving resources to broader emerging areas in information literacy instruction and scholarly communications.

Minimum Standards for Research/Scholarly Activities of Library Faculty

Library Faculty are expected to engage in research/scholarly activities. The standard annual assignment for research and scholarly activities typically comprises 5 to 20 percent of a Library Faculty member’s assignment. The wide range of Library Faculty assignments at KU and the demands of 12-month appointments lead to broad variations in the type and amount of research/scholarly activities in which they engage. As previously stated in the Unit Expectations section, Library Faculty are expected to pursue a program of scholarship yielding high quality results, which include those works subject to peer assessment. In this way, Library Faculty will contribute to enhancing the profession of librarianship or a related area or a specialized subject area in which they conduct research/scholarly activities. All Library Faculty are expected to engage in consistent and sustained research/scholarly activities.

Minimum Standards for Service of Library Faculty

It is a natural outgrowth of a Library Faculty member’s professional performance that s/he will participate in service activities that contribute to KU Libraries, to the University of Kansas, or to professional organizations at the local, regional, national, or international level.

Library Faculty service is evaluated on the basis of quality and is demonstrated by the level of contribution and the significance or impact of the service. Contributions that require a substantial effort and produce significant results will be rated more highly. The Library Faculty member’s service should reflect continued growth and leadership over time. Evidence of service may include, but is not limited to, actively participating in library, university, state, regional, national, or international professional committees and task forces; serving as the chair of a committee or task force, or as an officer of a local, state, regional, national, or international professional organization; providing consulting services to or planning programs or conferences for professional organizations; mentoring new faculty or mentoring within the profession; or making presentations to community groups or civic organizations.

3. Differential Allocation of Effort

Weighting of the three components (professional performance, service, and research/scholarly activities) in the performance evaluations of Library Faculty will be determined individually by each Library Faculty member in consultation with his/her supervisor and the library administration. The percentages can be adjusted outside the typical ranges only upon final approval by the Dean. During their evaluation review, every Library Faculty member discusses with his/her supervisor the appropriate percentage (weighting) to be applied for the evaluation of professional performance, service, and research/scholarly activities for the upcoming year. The weighting is done in keeping with the Libraries' and individual's goals and the typical Library Faculty member weighting distribution. Special circumstances are taken into account in allowing variation of the normal weights among the components for post-tenure faculty. Should the weights of any of the three main components (professional performance, service, and research/scholarly activities) vary beyond the ranges suggested, the Dean's concurrence is required. In all cases, weighting and professional goals will be documented in the Faculty Annual Evaluation with a statement of the extraordinary circumstances. In any instance in which the faculty member and the supervisor cannot agree to the appropriate weighting for the individual Library Faculty member, an appeal may be made to the Dean of Libraries by either of the parties. The Dean's decision cannot be appealed except for reasons involving process or discrimination. Variability of weighting across Library Faculty is achieved through the adjustable scale applied to the professional performance, research/scholarly activities, and service components of the evaluation, so that in any given year, recognition of special or unusual circumstances as well as individual accomplishments, is accounted for.

If in the course of the evaluation year, factors beyond the Library Faculty member’s control should substantially affect the proportion of effort dedicated to professional performance, service, and research/scholarly activities, s/he can reopen discussion of the weighting to be applied to that year’s evaluation. The use of an adjustable scale allows the library administration and the Library Faculty member to recognize individual differences among Library Faculty, as well as variation in assignments designed to meet the operational needs and goals of the Libraries. Typical ranges to recognize variability are:

Professional Performance	70 - 90%
Service	*5 - 15%
Research/scholarly activities	*5 -20%
Total	100%

*Service and research/scholarly activities percentages may not ordinarily be less than 5% each and will each generally total between 10% and 20% of the weighting of the performance evaluation.

ANNUAL EVALUATION SYSTEM

1. Overview

The evaluation process is determined by the members of the Library Faculty Assembly (LFA). Any changes in the Promotion and Tenure Procedures for the Faculty of the University of Kansas Libraries documents should be made prior to the calendar year in which they are to be applied. The evaluation process begins with the completion of each Library Faculty member’s assessment of their accomplishments during the year under review, which is documented in the in three categories—professional performance, service, and research/ scholarly activities. Each Library Faculty member must review the Statement of Responsibility in consultation with the supervisor, each of whom shall maintain a copy of this statement. Attach a copy to the annual evaluation form when it is sent to the Libraries’ administrative office. Revise it as duties and responsibilities change.

2. Portfolio or Annual Report Preparation

The annual review process provides the opportunity for Library Faculty members to engage in a self-assessment of professional performance, research/scholarly activities, and service. The assessment also addresses goals written by Library Faculty members in consultation with their supervisor for the evaluative year. The Library Faculty member also addresses to what extent those goals were accomplished and proposes goals for the upcoming calendar year. The Library Faculty member completes the Faculty Annual Review based on documented instructions and proposes the percentages (see section Differential Allocation of Effort) that reflect the weight to be assigned during the next year for each of the three performance areas—professional performance, service, and research / scholarly activities. Library Faculty members are encouraged to attach any letters, reviews of their work, or other supporting documentation that might assist in explaining the nature and quality of their work. When a Library Faculty member’s assignment includes instruction, s/he can include a variety of examples of evaluative measures such as student and peer evaluations. All such documentation is returned to the Library Faculty member by the supervisor prior to the Dean’s review, unless the Library Faculty member specifically requests that the documentation accompany the Faculty Annual Review throughout the entire process. The Faculty Annual Review allows for inclusion of reports of activities that extend beyond the evaluation period. Within the statement on professional performance, the Library Faculty member is instructed to highlight the most important activities and accomplishments for the past year, which might include progress on multi-year projects. The Library Faculty member then submits the Faculty Annual Review documentation to the supervisor.

3. Portfolio or Annual Report Review and Evaluation

Supervisor’s Review (January through early March)

The supervisor assesses the Library Faculty member’s professional performance through the observation of and familiarity with the individual's work and the documentation provided by the Library Faculty member, along with any evaluative comments received from colleagues and/or recipients of service.

In evaluating professional performance, the supervisor utilizes the Promotion and Tenure Procedures and the Criteria for Ranks, which are available to all Library Faculty, along with the Faculty Annual Review documentation and the criteria developed for each functional area. Likewise, the supervisor reviews and assesses the service and research/scholarly activities components of the Library Faculty member’s Faculty Annual Review. A rating statement is made separately for each area of evaluation.

In accordance with FSRR 6.5.1.2, the supervisor will consider the qualifications of tenured faculty members below the rank of Librarian (highest rank, equivalent to Professor) with a view toward possible promotion in rank in the future and, if appropriate, discuss the potential for initiating promotion procedures with the Library Faculty member.

The evaluation process includes the opportunity for Library Faculty members to add comments to the evaluation documentation as part of the official evaluation before the document is considered at a higher administrative level, e.g., before the Dean reviews it.

Evaluative statements for each of the three areas (professional performance, research/scholarly activities, and service) will be provided. An overall rating statement, described below, is assigned by the supervisor to indicate how well the Library Faculty member met performance expectations. The supervisor will meet with the Library Faculty member no later than March 1st to discuss the evaluation and the Library Faculty member’s future goals.

Evaluative statements for each of the three areas (professional performance, research/scholarly activities, and service) will be provided and a rating will be assigned from among the following:

• Exceeds expectations – Library Faculty member consistently exceeds goals and expectations of his/her professional responsibilities, research/scholarly activities, and service.
• Meets expectations – Library Faculty member meets the goals and expectations of his/her professional responsibilities, research/scholarly activities, and service.
• Needs improvement – Library Faculty member meets goals and expectations in some areas of his/her professional responsibilities, research/scholarly activities, and service, but needs improvement in specific areas as identified.
  An indication that expectations are not being met (i.e. “Needs improvement”) in any given year constitutes a signal to the Library Faculty member that quick and significant improvement in one or more areas is expected. Indefinite performance at this level is not acceptable and should be viewed as borderline, which warrants intervention by the supervisor and the library administration to rectify deficiencies. Specific goals detailing areas in need of improvement must be documented to facilitate a shared understanding of the issues and the steps that will be taken.
• Unsatisfactory – Library Faculty member consistently falls short of goals and expectations in all three areas.

This rating initiates a process that could lead to dismissal.

Dean’s Review (Mid-March)

The Dean reviews each Library Faculty member’s Faculty Annual Review and evaluation summary, provides appropriate comment (if any), and signs the form.

Appeal Process (in the case of disagreement concerning the evaluation)

Library Faculty members may appeal the library administration’s professional performance, service, and/or research/ scholarly activities evaluation by notifying the Libraries’ Human Resource Officer of an intention to do so within seven (7) calendar days of signing the Annual Review. The Human Resources Officer will establish an ad hoc appeals committee as detailed in Section C.2.b.2.e of the Handbook for Faculty and Other Unclassified Staff.

4. Annual Evaluation Feedback Process

Outcomes of discussions with the supervisor that must be documented include:

• Any consequences connected with the Library Faculty member’s rating in a particular category (such as specific performance improvement goals)
• Potential development opportunities for the Library Faculty member, especially in a case when a rating in any area indicates a deficiency in that area
• Ramifications of failure to improve any deficient areas
• Goals and expectations for the Library Faculty member for the coming year

At this point, the Statement of Responsibilities is reviewed and revised as necessary. (Revised Statements of Responsibilities are to be forwarded to the administrative office and copies should be retained by the Library Faculty member and supervisor.) The Library Faculty member and supervisor now meet to discuss the evaluation and sign the resulting documentation. (Provisions within that documentation can be updated during the course of the following year if circumstances involving the Library Faculty member change substantially so as to have an effect on one or more of those documented items.) The supervisor is responsible for working with the supervisee to review the balance of professional performance responsibilities with research/scholarly activities and service.

Final Notification

After the annual evaluation process is complete, the Library Faculty member receives notification from the Dean of Libraries informing him/her of the final performance evaluation statement. Subsequently, the Library Faculty member will receive a letter from the Dean of Libraries with the salary for the upcoming fiscal year, and if merit salary funding is available, the distribution of merit awards among LFSA members.

5. Post Tenure Review and Integration into the Annual Evaluation Process

During the year of post tenure review, the Library Faculty member will submit their post tenure review documents to the supervisor for annual evaluation purposes. The supervisor may require additional supporting documentation and supplementary materials as agreed upon by the supervisor and Library Faculty member.

6. Outcomes of the Annual Performance Evaluation

Outcomes of the annual performance review are varied with broad impacts on the goals of the Libraries, as well as on individual professional development, but can provide:

• Data contributing to salary determination
• A review of the Library Faculty member’s professional performance, service, and research/scholarly goals and the relationship of those goals to the overall mission of the Libraries
• Recognition of the accomplishments of Library Faculty member, which also has an impact on promotion and tenure decisions
• The opportunity to adjust allocation of effort among the individual’s professional performance, research / scholarly activities, and service components, balancing the individual’s professional goals with the institution’s mission
• The development of a written plan for improvement in the case of unacceptable performance
• The opportunity to consider the need each Library Faculty member might have for renewal and development

7. Faculty Development Initiatives

In addition to University-wide faculty development opportunities, the Libraries routinely provide information about opportunities for sabbaticals, professional activities, continuing education, and the chance to apply for funds to support research. The Committee for Research and Scholarly Activities of the Library Faculty and Staff Assembly assists Library Faculty in developing and pursuing opportunities to develop their research and other scholarly activities. Faculty might be able to shift responsibilities through temporary or permanent assignments in other library units as appropriate for the individual's professional goals and the institution's mission.

APPENDICES

Appendix A: Promotion and Tenure Criteria and Procedures

Criteria and procedures, including committee membership, should be consistent with Faculty Senate Rules and Regulations, Article VI as approved by the Chancellor in September of 2007.

NOTE: Additional appendices, such as the required annual report format, can be included.