STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK AT STONY BROOK
LIBRARY PROMOTION AND TENURE PROCEDURES
Revised June 1991
Second revision, April, 2005

Page

1. Policies of the Board of Trustees	1 
1.1 Library Criteria for Promotion and Continuing
Appointment									2
1.2 Mandatory Review for Continuing Appointment				4
1.3 New Appointments								5

2. Department Evaluation and Recommendation
2.1 Initiation of Candidacy								5
2.2 Special Cases									6
2.3 Announcement of Candidacy							7
2.4 The Candidacy File								7
2.5 Evaluation									11
2.6 Submission to the University Senate’s Library Promotion and Tenure Committee and Operation of the Committee					12
3. New Appointments
4. Evaluation by the University Senate’s Library Promotion and 
Tenure Committee								14
5. Evaluation by the Provost							16
6. Action by the President								15

7. Appendices

7.1 Sample Announcement of Initiation of a Candidacy for Promotion
and/or Continuing Appointment:						16 
7.2 Sample Letters of Solicitation for Promotion and/or Continuing
Appointment									17
7.3 Sample Bibliography								19
7.4 Suggested Order of Material in File						20
7.5 Effectiveness as a Librarian: Major Library Functions			22
7.6 Examples of Scholarly Ability							25 
7.7 Guidelines for Application of Criteria for Promotion to
Specific Ranks								26 
7.8 Guidelines for Application of Criteria for Continuing Appointment 	27

STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK AT STONY BROOK

LIBRARY PROMOTION AND TENURE PROCEDURES

INTRODUCTION

The procedures which follow have been developed from and modeled upon those of the Personnel Policy Committee, College of Arts and Sciences and the Dossier Proposal Draft submitted by the University Personnel Policy Committee. Changes have been made only where necessary to accommodate the somewhat different role of librarians as members of the faculty. As with the Arts and Sciences procedures, careful consideration was given to the Policies of the Board of Trustees and these policies have been interpreted to reflect the special role of librarians.

1.	POLICIES OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES 

Criteria

The Policies of the Board of Trustees, State University of New York, Art. XII, Title B, paragraph 2, indicate the elements which should be weighed in evaluating candidates for promotion and/or continuing appointment (tenure):

"Recommendations of academic employees, or their appropriate committees, or other appropriate sources may consider, but shall not be limited to consideration of, the following:

"(a) Mastery of subject matter—as demonstrated by such things as advanced degrees, licenses, honors, awards and reputation in the subject matter field.

"(b) Effectiveness in teaching—as demonstrated by such things as judgment of colleagues, development of teaching materials on new courses and student reaction, as determined from surveys, interviews and classroom observation.

"(c) Scholarly ability—as demonstrated by such things as success in developing and carrying out significant research work in the subject matter field, contribution to the arts, publications and reputation among colleagues.

"(d) Effectiveness of University service—as demonstrated by such things as College and University public service, committee work, administrative work, and work with students or community in addition to formal teacher-student relationships.

"(e) Continuing growth—as demonstrated by such things as reading, research or other activities to keep abreast of current developments in his/her fields and being able to handle successfully increased responsibility."

To further the commitment to affirmative action at SUNY Stony Brook, the following additional criteria will be applied when evaluating candidates for promotion and/or continuing appointment:

(f) Contributions to enriching the life of the university by correcting discrimination and encouraging diversity as demonstrated by significant research in line with the emerging scholarship concerning the conditions of life of women and minorities; teaching; and/or university service. A candidate's effectiveness in this regard will be judged where appropriate by accepting a diverse range of publications and vehicles for service, which address the special needs and interests of minorities and women in their efforts to obtain equal opportunity.

1.1 Library Criteria for Promotion and Continuing Appointment

The Library faculty shares the University's goals and contributes to the fulfillment of the campus mission in the areas of instruction, research, and service. However, librarians' contributions differ in nature and emphasis from those of professorial faculty. The criteria for promotion and continuing appointment outlined below are designed to recognize this fact.

(a) Mastery of subject matter—The basic credential is a Master's Degree in library or information science from an American Library Association-accredited program. Appropriate supplementary evidence might include additional earned degrees, certificates of advanced and/or specialized training, and language or subject expertise commensurate with a particular position description. For example, branch librarians normally need to have a strong subject background (e.g., biology, music) and catalog librarians working with foreign area studies materials must have the appropriate language proficiency.

b) Effectiveness as a librarian—The concept of effectiveness as a librarian comprehends a wide variety of individual abilities and achievements and constitutes an indispensable element in every candidacy. In order to be effective, the Library faculty as a whole must successfully develop, organize, manage, interpret, and promote access to a full range of library services and resources. Although every librarian must be able to demonstrate a general appreciation and understanding of all of the above, expectations of individual effectiveness may vary depending upon functional specialization within the libraries. 

(c) Scholarly ability—Librarians make significant scholarly contributions to librarianship through participation in the work of professional associations at the local, state, and national levels, the presentation of papers (i.e., the results of applied research) at professional conferences, appointment to consultantships, and a wide variety of scholarly publications, including, but not limited to, books, book chapters, peer-reviewed (or other) articles, bibliographies, finding aids, indexes, technical reports, thesauri, book reviews, catalogs, union lists, etc. Electronic and web publications of the preceding, as well as websites and webliographies are acceptable in this category.

It is essential that every librarian participate actively in at least one aspect of the broad range of individual and collegial achievements that constitute contribution to the profession. The growth of the profession depends on librarians with "on-the-job" experience who can articulate needs and devise solutions to problems and thereby influence the future direction of librarianship and information science. A librarian who is involved in solving the problems of the profession brings to his or her assigned library tasks breadth of vision, awareness of state-of-the-art practices at peer institutions, knowledge of current concepts of information service, and understanding of the process of change.

It is important to recognize that different expressions of scholarly activity may be appropriate to different librarians' specialties, e.g., a librarian involved in the selection of materials is more likely to write book reviews and prepare bibliographies than a catalog librarian who is more likely to organize a training program or be a member of a committee trying to improve national cataloging rules. Since quantitative limitations are imposed by the nature of a librarian's professional obligations, (i.e., a 12 month year consisting of structured work days spent largely on assigned in-house library tasks), evaluation should be primarily qualitative.

(d) Effectiveness of university and community service—This criterion may be demonstrated by such activities as successful committee work, participation in library  and university governance, special university administrative assignments and tasks, involvement with campus groups, work with students or community beyond the formal librarian-patron relationships, offices held in scholarly or professional organizations, refereeing proposals, local community services, etc. Appropriate evaluators include chairpersons of committees or other appropriate community or organization leaders.

(e) Continuing growth—This criterion may be demonstrated by such activities as attendance at continuing education courses, professional or scholarly meetings, workshops, institutes, training programs; in-depth analyses of other libraries; internships; development of professionally related skills; formal or informal course work; and advanced degrees.

(f) Contributions to enriching the life of the university by correcting discrimination and encouraging diversity—As demonstrated by significant research in line with the emerging scholarship concerning the conditions of life of women and minorities; teaching; and/or university service. A candidate's effectiveness in this regard will be judged where appropriate by accepting a diverse range of publications and vehicles for service, which address the special needs and interests of minorities and women in their efforts to obtain equal opportunity.

1.2 Mandatory Review for Continuing Appointment

 1.2.1 The Trustees' Policies (Article XI) also define the regulations on continuing appointment: Librarians and Associate Librarians on term appointments must be granted continuing appointment if reappointed at the end of three years of service in the ranks of Associate Librarian or Librarian. Senior Assistant Librarians and Assistant Librarians must be reappointed with continuing appointment if they have completed seven years of service in a position or positions of academic rank in the University of which the last three Consecutive years have been as Assistant Librarian or Senior Assistant Librarian. Satisfactory full-time service in academic rank in any other institution of higher education shall be credited as service up to a maximum of three years, but waiver of all or part of this service credit shall be granted upon written request of the employee to the chief administrative officer not later than six months after the date of the initial appointment. Such requests should be submitted to the Director for forwarding to the administration.

 1.2.2 Continuing appointment cases must be considered at least one year prior to the time when continuing appointment would become mandatory or when the final term appointment would expire (Policies, Art. XI, Title D, section 5).
(e) (f)

1.2.3	Associate or full librarians holding a term appointment must be reviewed for continuing appointment not later than the second year of service in that rank.

1.2.4	Senior assistant librarians or assistant librarians who have neither been reviewed for tenure at Stony Brook University nor submitted a letter of resignation must be reviewed for continuing appointment not later than the sixth year of service in that rank.

1.2.5	In computing consecutive years of service for the purposes of appointment or reappointment, periods of leave of absence at full salary shall be included; periods of leave of absence at partial salary or without salary and periods of part-time service shall not be included, but shall not be deemed an interruption of otherwise consecutive service. 

1.3 New Appointments

1.3.1	New appointments at the senior level (Associate Librarian or Librarian) and new part-time continuing appointments at the senior level are also to be reviewed by the committee. Files for these appointments should adhere to the specifications given in section 3.

1.3.2 Files for new appointments should show evidence that affirmative action guidelines have been observed and that the best qualified candidate has been proposed. (EEOC approval or non-approval must be obtained before the file is sent to the Committee.)

2. DEPARTMENT EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATION

2.1 Initiation of Candidacy

2.1.1	The Director ordinarily initiates a candidacy for promotion to higher rank, or for a continuing appointment or both, having obtained the consent of the faculty member involved. The Director is responsible for assembling the candidacy file.

2.1.2 When consideration of continuing appointment is mandatory, the Director must notify the candidate and proceed with the evaluation unless the candidate submits a resignation, to take effect no later than the end of his or her term.

2.1.3	Except as noted in section 2.1.4, any individual faculty member of 
academic rank may, with the approval of his/her department, initiate his/her candidacy for promotion and/or continuing appointment at any time prior to either receiving notice of non-reappointment or submitting a resignation. This request must be communicated in writing to the Director by the candidate. The Director must then convene the department to consider the request. The candidacy file will be assumable by the Director in accordance with 2.1.1 above.

 2.1.4 Reconsideration of a non-mandatory case in the year immediately following non-approval of a promotion or tenure recommendation is subject to a review as provided in section 2.2.2.

2.1.5 If the department does not approve a faculty member's request for a review, the faculty member may appeal the decision to the University Senate’s Library Promotion and Tenure Committee after receiving written notification of the department’s decision. The appeal must be accompanied by supporting documents. In the case of a negative decision by the University Senate’s Library Promotion and Tenure Committee, the case may be appealed to the Provost for a final decision.

2.2 Special Cases

2.2.1 Where a letter of termination of employment has already been received or where a letter of resignation has been submitted and accepted, the decision whether or not to submit or resubmit a case to the University Senate’s Library Promotion and Tenure Committee will be made by the Provost.

2.2.2 Reconsideration of a non-mandatory case in the year immediately following non-approval of a promotion or tenure recommendation should only be requested on the basis of strong evidence that a substantially higher level of achievement has been reached in the intervening year. The resubmitted file should then be presented in two parts.

Part I. An account of the professional status of the candidate when last considered, together with full documentation and supporting evidence, prepared according to the present norms (in which the confidentiality of solicited letters is preserved). This account will be divided into biographic and evaluative files.

Part II. An account of the present professional status of the candidate containing a) a new curriculum vitae, b) updated departmental recommendation and, c) updated letter from the Director, d) new documentary materials, e) additional solicited letters of reference. This account will also contain a biographic file and an evaluative file and will be prepared according to the present norms for presenting such files.

The two parts will be submitted by the Director to the University Senate’s Library Promotion and Tenure Committee.

2.2.3	Whether or not a resubmitted case merits a new review will depend on the cooperative evaluation of the contents of Parts I and II of the resubmitted file. The department makes its recommendation to the University Senate’s Library Promotion and Tenure Committee and the Committee will take into account whether a substantially higher level of achievement has been reached in the intervening year.

2.2.4	If a case becomes mandatory within a year after a prior submission, 
the file should be constructed as indicated in 2.2.2 above.

2.2.5	After two years, normal procedures for submission of candidacy files should be followed.

2.3 Announcement of Candidacy

The initiation of each candidacy for promotion and/or continuing appointment shall be communicated in writing by the Director to all University Libraries faculty members. This written announcement shall include a statement from the Director soliciting letters of comment from any member of the University community. Such announcements must give each respondent the opportunity to specify that the candidate may have access to her/his letter either as it stands or with all reference to the identity of the source removed. If such permission is not given, a response will be considered confidential and will be placed in the special evaluative file (See Section 2.4.5). A sample letter of announcement is supplied below in section 7.1.

2.4 The Candidacy File (Note: The following section pertains to internal cases; for outside appointments, see Section 3.)

2.4.1	The candidacy file contains three parts:

A. The biographic file drawn up by the candidate. The file is available to all who have a right to contribute to the evaluative file.

B. The general Evaluative File containing confidential information that the candidate may review before the President's decision is made. This material is available to the appropriate faculty group, to the University Senate’s Library Promotion and Tenure Committee and to the higher academic administrators as well as to the candidate at the appropriate time.

C. The special Evaluative File containing confidential material that is not accessible to the candidate, but only to the appropriate faculty, the University Senate’s Library Promotion and Tenure Committee and the higher academic administrators.

 2.4.2 The Director shall be responsible for the collection and submission of appropriate materials on each candidate for promotion and/or continuing appointment (see 2.1.1). When the Director is a candidate, the administrator to whom the Director reports shall be responsible for the preparation of the candidacy file. The candidacy file shall not be circulated to persons other than those specifically authorized to review it in accordance with these Procedures, with the exception that the biographic file may be made available to others at the request of the candidate. Items contained in the special evaluative file will not became part of the personnel file.

2.4.2.1 The candidate’s mentoring committee shall be responsible for advising her/him on the preparation of the file.

2.4.3	The Biographic File

2.4.3.1 Each candidate for promotion and/or continuing appointment shall prepare a biographic file that will become part of the candidacy file. The biographic file shall include the candidate's education, experience as a librarian, other professional experience, library goals, professional participation outside the university, invited lectures and papers, publications, honors, grants, recent Library and University service, continuing growth activities, and, where appropriate, teaching activity and teaching goals, and any additional relevant information.

2.4.3.2 The list of publications should be broken down into the following categories: 1) books and monographs; 2) articles (refereed articles should be so indicated); 3) abstracts, book reviews; 4) miscellaneous published material (optional). If a book is edited, then pages of text that have been written by the candidate should be indicated. Abstracts should be so designated. In all instances, authors should be listed as they are on the title page. If the profession follows a special convention for identifying senior authorship, this should be so indicated. See appendix 7.3 for a detailed example of bibliographic form.

2.4.3.3 Representative copies of the candidate's professional work should be included, along with copies of published reviews and appraisals of the candidate's work.

2.4.3.4 A personal statement which indicates the candidate’s past accomplishments, current activities and/or materials designed to improve the Library program, and future goals shall also be supplied.

2.4.3.5 When appropriate, the following material relevant to the candidate's teaching activity should normally be included:

1) A list of courses taught since the candidate's last appointment or promotion. This list should indicate the title and number of the course, the enrollment, and the group for which it is intended (e.g., undergraduate majors, non-majors, first-year graduate students, etc.).

2) Such evaluation of the candidate's teaching ability as is available and appropriate.

2.4.3.6 Service contributions should be arranged in the following categories: a) library service; b) University service; c) professional service outside the University; d) community service associated with field of specialization or with the University. The account should plainly indicate dates of service and roles taken (e.g., member, chair of committee) and should mention any special contribution (e.g., prepared 56-page report on undergraduate curriculum reform).

2.4.3.7 The completed biographic file with the dated signature of the candidate should be submitted to the Director.

2.4.4.	The General Evaluative File

2.4.4.1 The general evaluative file will contain all supervisory evaluations. These include the reports of the line supervisor as well as the Director's letter summarizing the views and recommendations of the appropriate faculty group, the Director's own letter if this is different from the former and the formal minority report, if one has been drawn up. These letters should provide a clear and specific summary of the case while still preserving the confidentiality of solicited opinions. This may be done by referring in the summary letter to "such and such a point raised by Librarian X," or "the statement from Referee Y." A key identifying X and Y by name should be provided for these references and included in the special evaluative file, but not seen by the candidate. The general evaluative file will also contain the report of the University Senate’s Library Promotion and Tenure Committee on the case.

2.4.4.2 When writers of solicited letters have given permission for the candidate to see their letters, copies of their letters (either as written or with identity of source and authorship removed, as specified by the writer) will be included in the General Evaluative File. The originals will stand in the section of the Special Evaluative File that contains solicited evaluations from outside referees, colleagues and students.

2.4.5	The Special Evaluative File

2.4.5.1 The Special Evaluative File should contain the written evaluations of at least four authorities suggested by the candidate. Whenever possible, additional independent outside evaluations will be solicited by the Director. While it is hoped that some of these evaluations will be from authorities outside the University, this is mandatory only in cases of promotion to the rank of Associate Librarian or above and in cases involving continuing appointment. In such cases at least one evaluation must come from outside the University and no more than two solicited evaluations may be from within the candidate's own library department. Each such letter in the file should have attached to it a copy of the letter soliciting it together with a statement identifying the authority and indicating the relationship, if any, with the candidate if this information is not offered in the letter of reference. These letters should generally not be more than two years old. All letters written in a language other than English should be accompanied by a translation. Anonymous letters may not be included in the file. Biographies of evaluators outside the University should be included in the file whenever possible.

2 4.5.2 The letters sent by the Director to solicit the referees' opinions should be accompanied by the candidate's curriculum vitae as well as by documentation selected by the candidate. The soliciting letter should contain all the substantive points included in the sample below (section 7.2).

It should request the referee

a)	to include specific evaluation of the candidate's professional achievements, (rather than merely to comment on the general character or promise of the candidate;

b) 	to compare the candidate's scholarly or professional contributions with those of others in the candidate's field who are at a comparable career stage;

c) 	to comment on whether the candidate would be granted tenure and/or promotion in the reviewer's own institution;

d)	to indicate whether the candidate may read the letter of evaluation as it stands, whether she/he may read the letter if all identification as to its source is deleted, or whether the candidate may not read the letter.

2.4.5.3 	When the candidate has engaged in teaching, research or service in the University, but outside of the University Libraries, letters from those in a position to evaluate these contributions should be included in the candidacy file.

2.4.5.4 	All letters soliciting opinions from outside authorities, all responses received from them, and all solicited letters (those contributed under these procedures) from within the University must be included in the file.

2.5 	Evaluation

2.5.1 An appropriate group of faculty shall be responsible for evaluating and making a recommendation on each candidate for promotion and/or continuing appointment. The appropriate group will vary according to the type of action being considered.

Promotion: All members of the University Libraries faculty who are of higher rank than the candidate.

Continuing Appointment: All members of the University Libraries faculty with a continuing appointment.

2.5.2 If, in a case of continuing appointment, the candidate's department is not large enough to form an appropriate group of at least seven members, such a group will be constituted by the Provost after consultation with the Director and the candidate. If, in a case of promotion, the appropriate group believes it is too few in number to present an effective file, an enlarged group will be constituted by the Provost after consultation with the Director, the original appropriate group, and the candidate. When such cases originate in the Health Sciences Library, the Vice President for Health Sciences, rather than the Provost, will be involved.

2.5.3 The appropriate faculty group, in advance of making its recommendation, shall have ready access to the completed file and to a copy of these Procedures. The file shall carry on its face the names of all those faculty eligible to consult it, with space provided for their signatures. Each eligible faculty member consulting the file shall sign the cover sheet to indicate that his or her examination of the file has been completed.

2.5.4 The appropriate faculty group, having examined the candidate's file, shall convene to rake a recommendation in that case. Individual faculty is strongly urged to expand on their votes by writing letters for the file. Such letters will normally be addressed to the Director. This may be done either in the case of positive or negative opinions.

2.5.5 Any department member who wishes to express his or her views about a departmental decision in writing may do so. These letters will be treated as solicited letters and must be included in the file reviewed by the faculty voting in this case. Departments should allow a suitable period of time after the meetings and vote on a case for letters stimulated by the discussions or solicited subsequent to them to be added to the file before the deadline for submission to the University Senate’s Library Promotion and Tenure Committee. In all cases, the appropriate faculty group shall have an opportunity to review the letters and shall sign a cover sheet to indicate that they have seen the additional material. No Library faculty member(s) shall be hindered from contributing to a file while a case is under consideration after the departmental recommendation has been formulated so long as those eligible to vote review the contribution.

2.5.6 A list of the appropriate faculty group bearing a tally of their votes (approve:, disapprove or abstain) and their signatures shall be a part of the Special Evaluative File. The Committee supplies a standard cover sheet for this purpose. A positive outcome shall be defined as a positive recommendation by a majority of those eligible to vote.

2.5.7	After the vote has been taken, the Director shall write a letter stating the motion and providing a balanced summary of the views of the group. At the conclusion of the letter, there shall be a list of those eligible to read it and their signatures indicating that they have seen the document. This letter forms a part of the general evaluative file and shall be drawn up in accordance with the guidelines specified in section 2.4.4.1. If the Director's letter is supplemented by a formal minority report, this report shall also be included in the general evaluative file. The members of the same group that has read the Director's letter shall read the minority report and signify that they have seen it.

The Director may submit a separate letter commenting upon the recommendation of University Libraries, which shall be subject to review as stipulated in section 2.5.5. Both the summarizing letter and any additional letter from the chairperson form part of the general evaluative file and shall be drawn up in accordance with the guidelines specified in section 2.4.4.1.

2.5.8 The recommendation letter with its summary of departmental views and any additional letter from the Director shall be considered a draft until reviewed by the Provost's office for confidentiality of solicited opinions as indicated in Sec. 2.4.4.1. When a case involves Continuing Appointment, a copy of the Director's letter(s) and letters from other persons serving in a supervisory capacity in a direct line above the candidate shall be released immediately to the candidate following review and, if necessary, revision to preserve confidentiality of solicited opinions.

2.6 Submission to the University Senate’s Library Promotion and Tenure Committee  and Operation of the Committee.

 2.6.1 It shall be the responsibility of the Director to forward the recommendation letter, together with the completed file, to the University Senate’s Library Promotion and Tenure Committee, or directly to the Provost in the case of candidates seeking promotion to Senior Assistant Librarian rank. Consult section 7.4 for a suggested order of the items in the completed personnel file.

2.6.2	The Director's recommendation letter is considered a draft until reviewed for confidentiality of solicited opinions (see section 2.5.8).

2.6.3 March 15 is the deadline for submission of all mandatory tenure (continuing appointment) motions. An earlier date, January 1st, is the deadline for non-mandatory recommendations. It is understood, however, that the wide variation in appointment anniversary dates of librarians may require some adjustment of these deadlines. In no case may a file be submitted less than three months prior to the anniversary date.

2.6.4	The rank of all members of the University Senate’s Library Promotion and Tenure Committee must be at the level of Associate Professor/Associate Librarian or higher except for the one non-tenured library faculty member.

2.6.5 All members of the University Senate’s Library Promotion and Tenure Committee must hold continuing appointment except for the one non-tenured library faculty member.

2.6.6	Library faculty members of the University Senate’s Library Promotion and Tenure Committee
may not be candidates for promotion while members of the Committee.

2.6.7 All members of the Committee are eligible to vote on all cases, regardless of rank, except members of the Committee who are in the candidate's department (i.e. University Libraries or HSC Library).

2.6.8	A quorum is required and consists of a majority of the members eligible to vote on the specific candidacy under consideration.

2.6.9	The Committee will not review cases of promotion to a rank lower than that of Associate Librarian.

2.6.10	There shall be no direct communication whatsoever between any member
of the Committee and the candidate concerning his or her case. All communications to and from the Committee shall be in writing.

2.6.11 Where situations not covered by the Procedures specified in this section arise, the University Senate’s Library Promotion and Tenure Committee and the Executive Committee of the University Senate, in consultation with the Director of Libraries, the Provost, and the candidate, shall devise suitable means to deal with the case. The candidate shall be informed of the new procedures.

3. NEW APPOINTMENTS

3.1 Files for new appointments at the senior level (Associate Librarian or Librarian) with or without Continuing Appointment should contain a range of information commensurate with that required for internal cases. At a minimum, they must contain:

a) a complete, current curriculum vitae
b) copies of letters soliciting outside evaluations (s section 2.4.5.1)
c) letters from outside authorities evaluating the candidate's professional work and standing in the field (see section 2.4.5.1)
d) a letter from the Director summarizing the case for appointment (see section 2.5.7)
e) a tally of the votes of all those members of the University Libraries who would normally vote if this were an internal case (those of equal or higher rank, and all tenured faculty if continuing appointment is involved).

4. EVALUATION BY THE UNIVERSITY SENATE’S LIBRARY PROMOTION AND    TENURE COMMITTEE

4.1 The University Senate’s Library Promotion and Tenure Committee will review and evaluate the file. Prior to reaching a decision the Committee may seek additional information. Substantively new information affecting the evaluation of the candidate will be shared with the department prior to forwarding a recommendation so that the Director will have an opportunity to respond. This communication will be in keeping with the principle of confidentiality respecting the sources of that information.

4.2 If a prior recommendation is not likely to be upheld by the Committee, the reasons for such possible action will be summarized in writing and sent to the Director. The Committee will then entertain a written response from the Director within one week of its informing the department or program of its likely decision not to uphold the prior recommendation. After this communication, the committee will formulate its formal recommendation, which will follow the procedures outlined at 
the beginning of this section.

4.3 After completing its deliberations, the Committee forwards the file, together with the candidate’s recommendation, to the Provost. The Committee will communicate its recommendation to the Director after 14 days or when the President's action (see section 6) is known, whichever occurs sooner. The Director will communicate the Committee's recommendation to the candidate.

4.4 Apart from official communications by the Committee Chair, all members of the Committee are expected to maintain strict confidentiality about the deliberations of the Committee.

4.5 In all cases where files have been correctly completed according to the  specifications given above and have been submitted by March 15, the
Committee's recommendation will be forwarded to the Provost no later than April 30. Files from the Health Sciences Library should be forwarded by the Committee to the Vice President for Health Sciences, who will add his/her own evaluation and forward the file to the Provost.

5. EVALUATION BY THE PROVOST

5.1 After the Provost formulates a recommendation, he/she will forward it to the President. If the Provost disagrees with, or has questions about, the motion of the University Senate’s Library Promotion and Tenure Committee, the Provost shall confer with the Committee before formulating a recommendation.

5.2 When a case involves continuing appointment, a copy of the Provost's letter of recommendation will be released to the candidate immediately.

5.3 If substantively new information affecting evaluation of the candidate is added to the file after it has been considered by the University Senate’s Library Promotion and Tenure Committee, this information will be communicated to the Committee. If so requested, the appropriate administrative officers will discuss such information with the Committee, which shall have the right to add to the file its subsequent reaction.

5.4 The Provost will notify the candidate that the file is being forwarded to the President and that it is available for review in the Office of the President in accordance with Article 31.6 of the UUP Agreement.

6. ACTION BY THE PRESIDENT

6.1 In cases involving the granting of continuing appointment, the President makes a recommendation to the Chancellor and the Board of Trustees. In all other cases, the President makes the final decision, based on the array of previous faculty and administrative recommendations together with the supporting materials in the file.

6.2 When the President disagrees with the Committee recommendation, he or she may consult with the Committee before making the final decision. Such consultation should be carried out as early as possible to ensure a hearing by the full membership of the Committee.

6.3 A copy of the letter announcing the President's decision shall be sent to the University Senate’s Library Promotion and Tenure Committee.

7. APPENDICES

7.1 Sample announcement of initiation of a candidacy for promotion and/or continuing appointment:

To:	All Library Faculty Members

From:	(Name of the Director)

Subject: Announcement of Candidacy for (enter appropriate terms) of (name of candidate)

Date:

(Name of candidate) is a candidate for (enter appropriate terms). Any member of the University community, and especially any member of the Library faculty, is invited to write a letter commenting on this candidacy. Such letters will be made a part of the confidential evaluative file to be drawn up for this case. Among the factors indicated by the Policies of the Board of Trustees for consideration in promotion and tenure cases are: mastery of subject matter, effectiveness as a librarian, scholarly ability, effectiveness of university and community service, continuing growth, and contributions to enriching the life of the university by correcting discrimination and encouraging diversity.

Under the collective bargaining agreement, your letter will be held in confidence and placed in the confidential section of the file unless you indicate specifically that the candidate may read your letter, either as it stands or with all identification as to its source deleted. If you state that you do not wish it to be read by the candidate, or if you do not explicitly authorize release to the candidate, your letter will be held in confidence and placed in the confidential section of the file.

Exceptions to the policy above are letters from library faculty serving in a supervisory capacity in a direct line above the candidate. Such supervisory letters will be placed in the general evaluative file which is made available to the candidate at the appropriate time.

I would appreciate your providing a statement prior to (enter date). Thank you for your collegial assistance in helping us to reach an informed decision in this matter.

7.2 Sample letters of solicitation for promotion and/or continuing appointment

7.2.1	To reviewers within the university:

Dear _________________________:

We are considering the promotion of ______________ from the rank of ______________________ to ___________________ with/without tenure. In order to help us reach a decision we would appreciate your candid assessment of ______________'s professional achievements and standing in the field of librarianship. Please indicate to what extent you have had occasion to interact personally with the candidate.

For your convenience a current curriculum vitae is enclosed, as well as a copy of the criteria for promotion and continuing appointment of librarians. We would appreciate your providing a statement prior to ____________ concerning ___________'s mastery of subject matter, effectiveness as a librarian, scholarly ability, effectiveness of university and community service, continuing growth, and/or contributions to enriching the life of the university by correcting discrimination and encouraging diversity.

Under the collective bargaining agreement, your letter will be held in confidence and placed in the confidential section of the file unless you indicate specifically that the candidate may read your letter, either as it stands or with all identification as to its source deleted. If you state that you do not wish it to be read by the candidate, or if you do not explicitly authorize release to the candidate, your letter will be held in confidence and placed in the confidential section of the file.

Thank you for your collegial assistance in helping us to reach an informed decision in this matter. My colleagues and I appreciate the time and care which you devote to this case.

Sincerely,

7.2.2	To reviewers outside the university:

Dear ____________________________________:	

We are considering the promotion of from the rank of _________________  to _________________________ with/without tenure. In order to help us reach a decision, we would appreciate your candid assessment of __________________'s professional achievements and standing in the field of librarianship. For your convenience, a current curriculum vitae is enclosed. Please indicate to what extent you have had occasion to interact personally with the candidate.

We would especially value your expert opinion on the quality, originality and importance of the candidate's professional achievements and your estimation of how she/he compares in professional accomplishments with others of similar academic rank or experience. It would also be useful to know whether a candidate of ____________________'s qualifications would probably be promoted/receive tenure at your institution, if applicable. Any other information you can supply regarding the candidate's effectiveness as a librarian or her/his national or international reputation in the field of librarianship or her/his field of research would be greatly appreciated.

The candidate will not have access to your letter of reference unless you give us specific permission, in writing, to provide a copy to him/her. Such a written statement of permission from you must specify whether the candidate may see your letter in its entirety, as written, or only with all identification of source or authorship deleted.

Thank you for your collegial assistance in helping us to reach an informed decision in this matter. We would appreciate your providing a statement prior to ________.

My colleagues and I appreciate the time and care which you devote to this case.

Sincerely,

7.3	Sample Bibliography: 

Books:

Rio Grande do Sul and Brazilian Regionalism,	1882-1930	(Calif., Stanford University Press, 1971), xvi + 311pp.
Edited with Robert S. Byars. Quantitative Social Science Research on Latin America (Urbana: U. of Illinois Press, 1973, 272pp. (Preface and pp. 175-215 by author).
Translation of Rio Grande do Sul:	0 Regionalismo Gaucho e as Oriqens da
Revolucao de 1930 (Sao Paulo, Editora Perspectiva, 1975), 282pp.

Refereed articles:

"Porto Alegre: [Historical] Research Opportunities," in Getulio Vargas, ed., Brazil: Field Research Guide in the Social Sciences (New York, Inst. of Latin American Studies, Columbia University, 966), pp. 88-96.

"Sources for the Latin American Student Movement," in The Journal of Developing Areas, I (Jan 1967), pp. 215-226

Other articles:

"La Raza: Mexican-Americans in Rebellion," Trans Action, VI, 4 (Feb. 1969), pp. 35-41.

Same, reprinted (condensed) in Social Progress:	A Journal of
Church and Society, LIX 5 (May/June, 1969), pp. 30-35.

Same, reprinted in John H. Burma, ed., Mexican-Americans in the United States:	A Reader (Cambridge, Mass., Schenkman, 1970), pp.
459-478.

Book Reviews:

Hispanic American Historical Review - 5 
American Historical Review - 1
Journal of Interdisciplinary History - 1 
Journal of Social History - 1

Miscellaneous:

Poems, "Iracema,"	"Tupi ou nao Tupi," "Memorias de Ipanema," In Anthology of Brazilian Poetry (Metuchen, N.J., 1977), Scarecrow Press, pp. 91, 107-8, 230.

7.4 Suggested Order of Material in Files

I. Biographic File: with copies of publications and curriculum vitae  of the candidate. If extensive, a representative selection will suffice.

II. General Evaluative File (open to review by candidate at appropriate time):

a. Notice of, announcement of candidacy

b. Director's summary of views and recommendations of the appropriate faculty group: the authors of solicited opinions will be referred to by symbols X, Y, etc; followed by a list of those faculty eligible to read it and their signatures.

c. Director's own letter (if different from b.).

d. The line supervisor's letter (if different from c).

e. Letters from others in the supervisory chain (e.g. Assistant Director), when present.

f. Copies of standard form letters sent soliciting the references (without identification of the addressees).

g. Where appropriate, teaching evaluations in the form of summaries of questionnaire responses, etc., provided the names of respondents, whether faculty or students, are not included.

h. Published reviews and appraisals of the candidate's publications, contributions and scholarship.

i. Copies of letters of evaluation whose authors have indicated in writing that the candidate may see their letter. If such permission has been given only on condition that all identification as to its source is removed, a purged copy shall be provided here. All the original letters of evaluation shall be placed in the appropriate section of the Special Evaluative File.

III. Special Evaluative File (not open to review by candidate at any time):

a. Vote of appropriate faculty group (with signatures on sheet or ballots).

b. Statements regarding the outside reviewers' acquaintance with the candidate, if not offered in the letter of reference, and biographies of the outside reviewers whenever possible.

c. The key to symbols X, Y, etc., used to refer to the authors of solicited opinions.

d. Outside letters of evaluation. Letters from individuals suggested by the candidate should be so designated (see section 2.4.5.1). Put copies of soliciting letters in front of each reference letter.

e. Solicited letters of evaluation and recommendation from Stony Brook University personnel other than supervisory. Put copies of soliciting letters in front of each reference letter.

f. Where appropriate, teaching evaluations solicited from faculty or students.

A list of those who may review the file and comment on its contents should be attached to the complete file.

7.5 EFFECTIVENESS AS A LIBRARIAN:
MAJOR LIBRARY FUNCTIONS

A. SELECTION. Responsibility for the selection of library materials involves active participation in budget preparation and planning, keeping abreast of trends in curriculum development at both the undergraduate and graduate levels, developing an awareness of the research interests of professorial faculty and graduate students, formulating collection development policies and priorities, understanding the camps mission, familiarity with the academic programs of the University, intimate knowledge of the strengths and weaknesses in the Library collections, participation in regional, state, and national resource development programs, and working closely with professorial faculty to meet instructional needs. Selection officers need to have a strong subject background as well as knowledge of national, trade, and subject bibliography. Evidence of effectiveness may include up-to-date collection development policy statements, relevant extracts from evaluations of academic departments, statistical comparisons with standard holdings lists, and other collection measurement and evaluation profiles. Appropriate evaluators include professorial faculty, students and library faculty engaged in interpreting the collection to users, and, in same cases, colleagues at peer institutions.

B. ACQUISITIONS. Responsibility for the acquisition of library materials involves the organization and administration of efficient and cost-effective searching, ordering, receiving, claiming, and accounting operations, the administration of State contracts and budgeted allocations, and the provision of timely and accurate fiscal information (encumbrances, expenditures, and balances) to selection officers and library administrators for decision-making. Acquisitions librarians need to have a thorough understanding of generally accepted techniques of both manual and computer-assisted bibliographic verification, knowledge of the international book trade, familiarity with State purchasing regulations, extensive knowledge of national and trade bibliography, administrative skills, training in the principles of systems analysis and design, and ability to work closely with jobbers and publishers. Evidence of effectiveness may include the quality of documentation (i.e., flow charts, procedure manuals, and work forms), timeliness and reliability of reporting, fulfillment rates, error rates, turnaround time, and auditors’ reports. Appropriate evaluators include professorial and library faculty served, internal audit, budget, accounting, accounts payable, and purchasing departments, and, in some cases, colleagues at peer institutions.

C. CATALOGING. Catalog librarians are responsible for the bibliographical organization and control of materials. The cataloging process involves three separate, but integrated components: (1) Subject analysis, the most intellectual part of cataloging, involves the assignment of a) classification numbers which will bring together related items on the shelf, and b) subject headings which will bring together related items in the catalog. In-depth knowledge of subject terminologies and taxonomies, facility in foreign languages, research in appropriate reference tools, and familiarity with the principles of Library of Congress classification are required. (2) Descriptive cataloging involves the interpretation and application of a uniform cataloging code to describe items in terms of their chief bibliographical and physical characteristics as well as the determination of appropriate "access points" (i.e., author and title headings under which a patron may search in the catalog). Knowledge of the Anglo-American Cataloging Rules and the cataloging policies and practices of the Library of Congress is required. (3) Authority work involves developing and managing the syndetic structure of the libraries' catalogs. This includes determining the form of an access point under which library users are most likely to search as well as providing cross-references to and from related and alternative headings. Many specialized bibliographical and biographical works and other scholarly reference sources are used to prepare and maintain an authority file.

The catalog librarian's work should result in the provision of effective bibliographic access to the growing collection of research materials within the general framework of both the developing library-wide bibliographic infrastructure as well as the emerging regional, state, and national shared cataloging networks. Catalog librarians should be evaluated on (1) qualitative and quantitative standards; (2) the degree to which logical problem-solving and user-oriented approaches are used in translating cataloging theory into practice; (3) the degree to which useful suggestions are offered regarding policies and planning leading to the effective use of bibliographic records; (4) proficiency in utilizing the library's online shared cataloging system; (5) ability and willingness to share specialized expertise with others; (6) understanding of the specialized principles, functions, techniques, and purposes of cataloging research materials in a great variety of subjects, languages, and formats; and (7) demonstrated ability to recognize and resolve cataloging problems, and to initiate and implement cataloging projects. Evidence of effectiveness may include individual and "team cataloging" statistics, procedure manuals, workforms, and implementation memoranda. Appropriate evaluators include catalog and public services librarians and, in some cases, colleagues at peer institutions.

D. REFERENCE. Total reference service extends far beyond the utilization of printed information sources to answer ready-reference questions. The reference librarian seeks to help patrons answer questions and develop research skills by teaching them to use library resources and information technology. To promote access to collections and services, reference librarians compile bibliographies, library guides, indexes, catalogs, etc., conduct orientation sessions for new patrons, search computerized databases, acquire materials not available locally via interlibrary loan, and assist patrons in locating regional, state, and national resources. Reference librarians actively promote individual and group instruction in work with the academic departments they serve. Chief among their teaching responsibilities is course-related bibliographic instruction, which may involve participating with professorial faculty in classroom teaching, offering formal and/or informal courses and seminars in library research methods, teaching courses in
the area of a second master's or doctoral degree, participating in independent
and/or interdisciplinary studies programs, and working with professorial faculty in designing the library component for course syllabi. Reference librarians must also be able to give authoritative presentations to professorial faculty, students, and visitors regarding the library and its policies. Finally, reference librarians may provide a variety of other services to the general public as required, e.g., training disabled persons to use special library equipment.

Effective reference service requires strong human relations skills, as well as understanding of the various operations and services of the libraries, an ability to integrate and communicate this information to library users, familiarity with the research processes appropriate to the various disciplines, an ability to translate this knowledge into effective service, and a willingness to pursue patron problems to satisfactory solutions. Evidence of effectiveness may include library guides, bibliographies, indices, catalogs, service and/or collection statistics in data base services, bibliographic instruction, interlibrary loan, etc.; descriptions of special projects for the promotion and improvement of service; course syllabi, materials, and evaluations; acknowledgements in published works. Appropriate evaluators include professorial and library faculty, students, and, in some cases, colleagues at peer institutions.

E. MANAGEMENT. Since library services are often labor- and/or capital-intensive, management of personnel and/or other resources is almost always an important factor in evaluating effectiveness. Some administrative jobs consist primarily of management activities or activities in support of the management function, such as personnel, budget, and automation. A manager must be able to articulate goals and objectives and express them in meaningful documentation; establish policies and be effective in their execution; adjust program and procedures as necessary to accommodate changes in user needs, technological developments, and available resources; demonstrate competence in decision-making, planning, coordinating, organizing, and general leadership of a unit; consult in advance with members of the unit when considering major policy changes which affect the supervisory unit; recruit, train, and motivate staff and encourage staff development; treat and evaluate staff impartially and sensitively; delegate authority; assign, schedule and monitor workloads; cooperate and communicate effectively with members of the library faculty and staff, professorial faculty, and students in furthering the objectives and priorities of the library; and prepare periodic status reports in the form of meaningful statistics and narrative interpretation. Evidence of effectiveness includes training and procedure manuals, flow charts, quantitative measures of productivity, and statistical and narrative reports. Appropriate evaluators include professorial and library faculty, students, and, in same cases, colleagues at peer institutions.

7.6 EXAMPLES OF SCHOLARLY ABILITY

ACTIVITY

Meaningful and  significant participation (other than membership) in professional or scholarly organizations on the local, state or national level: committee chair or significant committee participation resulting in 
documentable achievements; contributions at conferences (papers presented, panel participation, chairing meetings, sessions)

EVIDENCE

  Descriptions and reviews of activities in newsletters, minutes of meetings, etc.
  Reports or other documents produced by committees
  Copies of representative work

EVALUATORS

Chairperson or other appropriate officer or member of organization

  Organizing workshops, institutes or similar meetings
  Consulting, serving as referee or member of a team of experts, review committee or similar body

Programs
  Published descriptions and reviews of activity in newsletters, journals, etc.
  Letters of invitation or appointment
  Mention of activity in newsletters, etc. 

 Person(s) who selected librarian for these activities
 Co-workers
 Person(s) served by these activities

  Receiving grants, 
fellowship, awards
Letters of award

“In house” achievements that contribute to the profession

Publishing activity: editing newsletters, journals, parts of journals; pub- lishing peer-reviewed or other articles, books, reports, reviews; compiling bibliographies; 
catalogs; indexes, etc.

Reports, handbooks, bibliographies, manuals, course designs, and similar items if they present new ideas, or incorporate research and/or are recognized by other libraries

List of publications
Evidence of works not yet published
Copies of representative published work along with copies of published reviews and appraisals of the candidates work 

Appropriate librarians in other libraries or library school faculty. [If evaluators are SBU librarians, activity should be used as evidence of the criterion “effective- ess as a librarian”]

Experts in the relevant area of librarianship or other discipline

7.7 GUIDELINES FOR APPLICATION of CRITERIA FOR
PROMOTION TO SPECIFIC RANKS

GENERAL

It is generally understood in a research university that production of new knowledge is the paramount criterion for promotion and continuing appointment even though this is not explicitly stated. The application of criteria for librarians cannot and should not share this emphasis. The library faculty supports the professorial faculty in this production of new knowledge through its functions of selecting, acquiring, organizing, and retrieving recorded knowledge. In many cases, it is more  appropriate and even crucial that a librarian contribute to the improvement of the practice of academic librarianship rather than produce new knowledge. Therefore, most library faculty should demonstrate professional ability and contributions to the profession rather than be expected to exhibit a body of research.

SENIOR ASSISTANT LIBRARIAN

It is of major importance that candidates for promotion to Senior Assistant Librarian demonstrate effectiveness as judged by colleagues and users of services.	Of lesser importance, candidates should demonstrate progress towards making substantial achievements in at least one of the following areas: scholarly ability or effectiveness of university and community service.

ASSOCIATE LIBRARIAN

It is of major importance that candidates for Associate Librarian have achieved a high level of effectiveness as librarians, contributing substantially to the area of specialization within the university libraries and showing initiative beyond assigned responsibilities. 

Also of major importance, candidates should demonstrate  substantial scholarly ability or effectiveness of university and community service. Examples of such achievements include but are not limited to the following: chairing a campus or library committee that makes a significant documentable contribution; holding a major office in a scholarly or professional organization and demonstrating effectiveness in fulfilling the responsibilities of the office; regularly publishing substantive reviews in a major library journal; editing the newsletter or a professional or scholarly organization.

Of lesser importance, candidates should also show evidence of same participation in activities that meet all the criteria.

LIBRARIAN

It is of major importance that candidates for Librarian have achieved a superior level of effectiveness as librarians, making contributions which have a recognizable impact on the services and operations of the university libraries.

Also of major importance, candidates should show evidence of distinguished contributions to the profession. Their professional development should have resulted in the attainment of regional, state or national recognition in the library profession.

Of lesser importance, candidates should show also evidence of participation in activities that meet all the criteria.

7.8 GUIDELINES FOR APPLICATION OF CRITERIA
FOR CONTINUING APPOINTMENTS

To qualify for continuing appointment, candidates should normally meet the criteria for promotion to Associate Librarian or higher, i.e., a high level of effectiveness as a librarian; substantial achievements in either scholarly ability or effectiveness of university and community service; and some participation in activities that meet all the criteria. In addition, it is of major importance that candidates show evidence that these achievements are ongoing and will continue.