|
Librarians Association of the |
The charge from the LAUC President to this year's Committee on
Professional Governance was as follows:
"I would like the committee to continue the work of last year's committee on developing and conducting a survey to the LAUC membership on what direction LAUC should take in addressing the distinguished step in the Librarian Series. There has been considerable discussion of issues related to this topic (e.g. should the distinguished designation occur at a particular step, what criteria are used to evaluate a career, etc.). Having the committee collect and summarize this type of information would be of great value to the LAUC Executive Board as we focus our energies in the coming years. In addition, the committee should continue the process started by last year's committee of revising LAUC Position Paper #1 in light of the recent changes to the librarian salary scale and in relation to the upcoming survey on the distinguished step. A proposed revision of Position Paper #1 could be sent as part of the survey or redrafted after the results of the survey have been compiled."
Accordingly, the committee met in Oakland at UCOP on February 28, 2002 to draft the survey on the distinguished step. Not surprisingly, agreeing on which questions to ask proved to be a daunting task, as people have very strong feelings about the distinguished step. Some wanted a very simple, basic survey (Should there be a distinguished designation? Should it be tied to a specific step? Should it be moved to the top of the scale?). Some wanted a more in-depth survey covering questions about sabbaticals, leaves of absence, LAUC research grants, and time available to work on criteria 2-4 activities. Ultimately the committee drafted a 10-question survey (Attachment A) that asked about the distinguished step and the criteria for meeting it, because we wanted data that could be used to support a revision of Position Paper #1. The committee based its survey questions on the issues paper attached to this report which summarized discussions by the 2000-2001 committee (Issues Concerning the Distinguished Designation Discussed by LAUC Committee on Professional Governance, 2001-Attachment G). Other questions were left for another survey.
There were discussions about whether to ask simple yes/no questions, or to offer a scale of agreement/disagreement, and we ultimately decided to retain the yes/no format for ease of quantifying the answers, but to add a "no opinion" option.
In April, the survey was distributed on each campus by the committee member from that campus, after holding meetings to discuss the survey. The results are set out in Attachment B-Response Rate by Campus, Attachment C-Overall Survey Results, and Attachment D-Survey Results by Campus.
Ultimately the survey instrument was a compromise of many differing points of view, and as such, it has its flaws. While it answered some questions decisively, others are perhaps still murky. Also the results are not clear cut for some questions simply because those responding were fairly evenly split in their opinions. But a few issues do emerge as an overwhelming mandate from the membership of LAUC, and these should offer some guidance in revising Position Paper #1.
According to the data submitted by each CPG campus representative there are a total of 524 librarians working in all of the nine UC campus libraries. There were 245 surveys returned from all the campuses, which calculates to a 46.75% return rate. This is a very high ratio of return and is an indication of the strong interest in this issue. The return rate varied from campus to campus with the lowest at 34% to the highest at 64%. We believe the response rate could have been even higher were it not for several trends taking place within UC libraries at this time. One is that many new librarians have been hired recently at almost every campus, as Assistant or Associate Libraians, and these individuals may not have felt familiar enough with the Review and Promotion process to respond to the survey. Another factor to consider is that this is the second year of the implementation of the new salary structure. The addition of two more steps to the Librarian series places the review for the Distinguished Step several years away from the current step of many UC librarians. Regardless, the Committee on Professional Governance was pleased with the number of surveys received, 46.75%.
Following is a summation of the responses to each of the ten questions in the survey.
Question #1
Should there be a distinguished designation in the librarian salary scale?
This question was placed first in the survey to determine how many librarians support the concept of a distinguished step. Out of a total of 245 responses 129 or 52% indicated 'yes' that there should be a distinguished designation in the librarian salary scale. Every survey taker answered this question, although there were 16 or 6% 'No opinions' and 100 or 41% 'No's, indicating that 47% either did not support or did not have an opinion about the distinguished designation. It seems there is a very close split, 52% to 47% between those who agree with a distinguished step and those who don't or cannot agree with it.
Question #2
Should the distinguished designation be at step VI of the new salary scale?
Is not apparent to everyone at which step the distinguished designation is placed under the new salary scale. This question meant to assess if UC librarians, who support the designation, want it placed at step VI. It was a confusing question to many, especially after Question #1, but it is clear that the majority do not agree with this question at all. The 'No's totaled 144 or 59%, with 48 or 20% having 'No opinion' and 7% not answering the question at all. This means that 86% of those taking the survey do not support or could not express an opinion about the distinguished designation at step VI.
Question #3
Should the distinguished designation be at step VII of the new salary scale?
Like Question #2 this question meant to assess if UC librarians, who supported a distinguished designation, wanted it placed at step VII. Again, the majority of responses did not support this choice, had no opinion about it, or did not express an opinion. Only 36% indicated 'Yes', while 42% indicated 'No', and 22% had no opinion or didn't answer the question at all. So in summary 64%, or 157 responses did not agree with placing the distinguished review at step VII.
Question #4
Should the distinguished designation be predicated on significant achievement (the "capstone" achievement)?
The purpose of this question was to establish how much support the "significant achievement" criteria had in determining the conferring of a distinguished designation to an individual. It was noticeably pointed out by several survey takers that the term "capstone achievement" does not appear in any review procedures, but it is a phrase commonly articulated among librarians themselves. Position Paper No.1, in paragraph 8 states "Advancement from Step IV to Sept V of the Librarian rank should be predicated upon a career history of outstanding service, capped by significant achievement in the period since attaining Step IV". This is the source of the expression "capstone achievement", evolving from the words "capped by significant achievement". Regardless, it is clear that most respondents do not support granting distinguished status on the basis of one significant achievement: only 66 or 27% answered 'Yes', 134 or 55% answered 'No', 24, 10% answered 'No opinion' and 21, 8% either did not answer the question or frankly stated they could not answer it.
Question #5
If the distinguished designation requires a "capstone" achievement, should it necessarily occur during the previous review period?
If there was support for a "capstone" achievement, the CPG wanted to understand where in the career review this achievement should be placed. This question asked if the significant achievement had to occur necessarily during the period of time since the previous review, regardless if the distinguished status was being granted at step VI or step VII. This has been the course of action in the past, as stated in Position Paper No. 1, and it is currently outlined in the 2001-02 Academic Salary Scale Notes where Item #6 states, "Advancement from Step V to Step VI is reserved for Librarians with a distinguished career history who have demonstrated significant achievement since attaining Step V." The majority of the survey respondents do not support this statement with only 6% indicating 'Yes'. 192 or 78% stated 'No' to this question, with 18 or 7% having 'No opinion', and 20 or 8% choosing to not answer the question.
Question #6
If the distinguished designation requires a "capstone" achievement, should it be achievable at any point in the librarian's career?
This question asked the alternative to the previous question. Could a capstone achievement be accomplished anytime in a librarian's career? For example, if a capstone achievement was achieved early in a librarian's career, did the individual have to achieve another significant achievement between steps V and VI in order to be granted distinguished status? The majority of the respondents supported this question, with 154 or 63% indicating 'Yes', and 42 or 17% indicating 'No', although there were a noteworthy number that expressed doubts. 25 or 10% had 'No opinion' and another 10% did not, or could not answer the question. However, it is clear that many librarians would like to see this criterion revised.
Question #7
If there is a distinguished designation, should it be based on a career history of outstanding service, without having to demonstrate a capstone achievement?
Again, as with the previous two questions this one was presented as another alternative to the current review criteria and procedures. The question asks if it is preferable to not have a "capstone" achievement and to base the granting of distinguished status on the basis of a total career of outstanding service. This concept had support from 176 respondents, or 72%, the highest support of any question in the survey. 42 or 18% indicated 'No' and 10% either had no opinion, did not answer the question, or indicated they could not answer the question. The majority of the respondents support the removal of a "significant achievement" as a requirement for granting the status of "Distinguished".
Question #8
If there is a distinguished designation, should it be based (circle one):
This question meant to assess where the majority of UC librarians felt the focus should be in reviewing the career of a librarian for distinguished status. The responses broke down as follows:
The strongest support, 46%, is for item c., which specifies a balance of all the criteria from 1-4. The second strongest support, 40%, is for item d., that indicates any of the previous items, a. - c. Many librarians feel there should be more emphasis on an individual career path, whether it's in criteria 2-4 or an exemplary performance in one's primary job, and item d. conveys this attitude. It is clear that items a and b that identify solely criterion 1 or criteria 2-4 are completely rejected by the majority of the respondents. The comments submitted by some respondents indicate that many feel they are not recognized for doing an outstanding job in their primary assignment, while others get promoted for outside work but are weak in their 'real' jobs. There is a call for a balance among all of the criteria and for recognition of individual career paths.
Question #9
Should the distinguished designation be unlinked (removed) from the salary scales and replaced by some type of UC-wide recognition for librarians who have achieved highly successful accomplishments?
This question asked if the distinguished designation should be removed completely from the review process. There is support for this question and much discussion in the comments submitted by the respondents. 129 or 53% support removing the granting of distinguished status from a set librarian step. 78 or 32% indicated 'No' and 12% indicated 'No opinion'. This means 44% stated no or had no opinion.
Question #10
Should the distinguished designation be unlinked from a particular step, but still be a requirement to be met at some point before advancing to the top step (VII)?
This question asked if the distinguished designation should be removed from a particular step, but could be met at any time in a librarian's career, not just at the end. The majority of respondents did not support this concept, 151 or 61% indicating 'No', and only 43 or 18% indicating 'Yes'. But a total of 51 or 21% either stated 'No opinion' or indicated they could not answer the question.
Of the 245 surveys that were returned, there were a total of 125 comments (and some respondents made more than one comment). The comments are summarized below, with numbers of respondents making a comment in bold following each statement. All 125 comments can be found at the in Attachment H. Some of the comments reiterate responses to questions asked on the survey, but the intensity of the responses can be seen by the number of people adding a written comment on a particular issue. Other comments raise issues not asked in the survey, but they aid in understanding how and why librarians answered the questions as they did.
Position Paper #1 (Attachment E) is the LAUC document that sets out criteria for the distinguished step. It is the only peer review document which both applies to all members of the librarian series and makes any mention of the distinguished step. The distinguished step is not included in the APM sections dealing with librarian review, and the Salary Scale Notes which do mention the distinguished step, apply only to non-represented librarians.
In August 2001, the Committee on Professional Governance drafted proposed revisions to Position Paper #1 (Attachment F). The proposed revisions were as follows:
The basis for the distinguished step in the salary scale arises from paragraphs 4 and 8 in Position Paper #1. The survey asked in question 1 whether there should be a distinguished designation in the salary scale and 52% of respondents said yes. The survey asked in question 9 whether the distinguished designation should be unlinked from the salary scales and replaced by some type of UC-wide recognition, and 53% said yes. It appears that the LAUC membership is evenly split on the question of whether to continue to have the distinguished step in the salary scale or as an award outside the salary scale. This question merits further study, perhaps by another survey in which alternatives are clearly spelled out.
If the distinguished step is to remain a part of the salary scale, Position Paper #1 needs to be changed to reflect the new step to which it will be attached, since it is currently based on the old scale. The survey asked whether the distinguished designation should be at step VI (15% said yes) or step VII (36% said yes). While more than twice as many respondents would prefer to see the distinguished step at VII than VI, the question was confusing because many people didn’t answer it if they had already answered “no” to the first question. This question also merits further study, perhaps with a more clearly worded survey.
In the survey, the committee wanted to test support among the LAUC membership for the changes in paragraph 8 particularly, since many librarians had expressed confusion about how to interpret the phrase “capped by significant achievement in the period since attaining Step IV.” Is it a single event, or is it many events over a period of time? How is it different from “a career history of outstanding service” (if at all)? There was also a feeling that you can’t always time a “significant achievement” to occur in the last review before the distinguished step, and a librarian shouldn’t be penalized if it happened earlier than that.
Survey questions 4-8 addressed the so-called capstone requirement for the distinguished step. Only 27% of respondents thought there needed to be a showing of a significant achievement, while 78% said that even if there were such a requirement it shouldn’t have to occur in the review period immediately before the distinguished step, and 63% said this significant achievement could occur at any point in a librarian’s career (although many noted in comments that it should probably happen later rather than earlier in a career, but just not necessarily in the last review period). And an overwhelming 72% said that if there is a distinguished designation, it should be based on a career history of outstanding service, without having to demonstrate a capstone achievement. Thus, the survey demonstrates very strong support for the committee’s proposed rewording of paragraph 8 which eliminates entirely the concept of a capstone achievement, emphasizing instead a career history of outstanding service.