May 2001
 

GUIDELINES FOR PREPARING SELF-EVALUATIONS

The Librarians Association of the University of California-Berkeley, with the advice and support of CAPA, have developed the following guidelines for composing the self-evaluation.  These guidelines, which are based on the
language of the APM, should clarify and simplify the review process.

The candidate's self-evaluation is a concise narrative statement citing the most significant achievements of the review period in the four review criteria and weighs heavily in the review process.   The candidate’s  judgment in writing a self-evaluation and in assembling appropriate documentation is an indication of professional judgment which reviewers take into account.

The self-evaluation is most effective when it:

• is succinct, well organized, and coherent.
• takes into account suggestions for professional development made by the supervisor, University Librarian, or other administrative officer in connection with the candidate's last review.
• emphasizes and evaluates the impact on the library and profession  of major accomplishments of the review period, indicating their relative importance.
• is realistic, and mentions failures and frustrations as well as successes.
• identifies specific sections of co-authored reports and specific  areas of committee work to which the candidate contributed, evaluating their subsequent or anticipated influence in the library or profession.
• indicates the judgment the candidate has exercised in making professional decisions on the job and in career planning.

Organization

• Introductory paragraph, stating what this self-evaluation will support; (accelerated) merit increase, promotion, career status.

 
• Section I -- Professional competence and quality of service within the Library (including attachments submitted as appendices, when appropriate)

This section analyzes a candidate's performance; it is done in the context of a comprehensive statement of the candidate's job assignments and academic responsibilities for the  review period, including special projects.   Librarians should relate their activities to the more general goals of the Library and the University.
 

• Section II -- Professional activity outside the Library

 
• Section III -- University and public service

 
• Section IV -- Research and other creative activity.

The impact and benefit of achievements in Sections II-IV to the Library, University, and the profession, should be highlighted. If no significant activity has occurred in a particular section, please state this under the appropriate heading.   The APM clearly states that "reasonable flexibility shall be exercised in weighing the comparative relevance of these criteria."   That means that no individual is required or expected to perform significantly in all areas at all the time, though as the librarian advances in rank, increasing attention is paid to activities in the wider library, institution and profession..
 

• Summary paragraph including goals and objectives for the next evaluation period and, taking a broader perspective, sets forth expectations regarding career direction and professional growth over the long term.

Documentation

Supporting documentation should be selective, judiciously chosen and
relevant to the period under review.

Merit reviews, Assistant and Associate Librarian rank
When the candidate and supervisor agree that a merit  increase is warranted, documentation is normally limited to the candidate's self-evaluation and the supervisor's evaluation.  The self-evaluation should not exceed 2-3 pages; supporting documentation is normally not included.

Merit Reviews, Librarian rank and accelerated merit reviews
For accelerated merit reviews, and merit reviews in the Librarian rank, the candidate may wish to prepare a longer self-evaluation and/or include supporting documentation.  Professional judgment should be exercised in choosing documentation to include in the dossier.

Special Reviews
The self-evaluation is brief and supporting documentation is normally not included.

Career and promotion reviews:
For career status and promotion reviews, a longer self-evaluation is expected and should cover the candidate’s entire career; CAPA prefers no more than 4 or 5 pages.  Supporting documentation should be included as appropriate.

Please follow these guidelines carefully.  Their use will speed the review process while giving a clear picture of your professional contributions and
achievements.

5/2001

---

---

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