U.C. Berkeley Library Web


The review initiator's evaluation provides a comprehensive evaluation of the candidate's performance and accomplishments both within and beyond the primary assignment.  It brings to bear direct knowledge of the candidate as well as knowledge gleaned from letters of reference, the candidate's documentation and other sources.

With input from the candidate, the review initiator solicits letters of reference from persons best able to assess the candidate's performance and accomplishments.  In the solicitations the review initiator requests comment on specific activities and contributions.  Letters of reference are appropriate in promotion and career status reviews, and may be appropriate in accelerated or decelerated merit reviews.

The review initiator's evaluation avoids repetition of the candidate's self evaluation.  It indicates whether or not there is agreement on the relative importance of the candidate's accomplishments during the period under
review.  To the extent that the review initiator differs from the candidate in  assessing accomplishment, the difference are clearly delineated.

The review initiator works with the candidate in identifying goals and objectives for the next review period.  In the evaluation the review initiator indicates whether there is agreement on goals and objectives; if there is disagreement, the review initiator identifies what she/he believes are goals and objectives for the candidate.

The review initiator's evaluation is most helpful in the review process when:

1)   it focuses on the period under review and is succinct, well organized,
     and coherent.
2)   it describes clearly the lines of authority in the unit, the scope of
     the candidate's responsibility, and the length of time such assignments
     have been in effect.
3)   it presents a balanced evaluation of the candidate's performance,
     including problem areas as well as particular strengths.
4)   insofar as possible, it considers the breadth and quality of the
     candidate's performance in relation to that typical of other librarians
     at the candidate's rank.
5)   it examines the candidate's performance for evidence of continued
     professional growth during the review period.
6)   it mentions special circumstances which may have limited the candidate's
     activity in areas where, given the past record, he/she might have been
     expected to continue to make significant contributions.
7)   it documents by specific examples the candidate's judgment, innovative
     ideas, management skills, or special professional expertise which have
     had positive influence among his/her colleagues and significant impact
     on the library programs and services.

Copyright (C) 2010 by the Library, University of California, Berkeley. All rights reserved.
Document maintained on server: http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/
Last update 9/27/01. Server manager: Contact