LAUC-SD Executive Board
Tuesday, September 21, 2004
Present: Mary Linn Bergstrom, chair; Peter Brueggeman, vice-chair/chair-elect; Harold Colson, guest-former CAPA chair; Penny Coppernoll-Blach, R&PD; Kari Lucas, guest-former LAUC-SD Secretary; James R. Jacobs, delegate; Sue McGuinness, R&PD; Adolfo Tarango, member-at-large, Jeff Williams, secretary.
Absent: 2004-2005 CAPA chair–appointment pending; 2004-2005 LAUC-SD Diversity Committee Chair–appointment pending.
ANNOUNCEMENTS/UPDATES:
The Board approved the minutes of the August 27th LAUC-SD Executive Board with minor spelling corrections.
The Board thanked Kari Lucas for her outstanding service as the 2003-2004 LAUC-SD Secretary.
DISCUSSION
The Board discussed Kari Lucas’ proposal for 1) LAUC-SD to take a greater role in annual peer review workshop, and 2) establish a new LAUC-SD position with responsibility for taking the lead on peer review related issues.
Kari informed the Board that her proposal was inspired by her observation that new librarians and new review initiators are having difficulty with the complex peer review process. The annual peer review workshop sponsored by Library Human Resources (LHR) is heavily weighted toward issues related to timelines and policies, with little discussion of the actual content of the review.
Harold Colson reported that CAPA discussed Kari’s proposal, and was in favor of LAUC-SD having a greater role in the peer review workshop. There was less agreement between CAPA members on the proposal for the establishment of a new LAUC-SD position for peer review.
Mary Linn Bergstrom asked if CAPA had an opinion on whether the issue with “problem” files is typically related to new librarians, or new review initiators. Harold reported that new review initiators seem to be the bigger factor.
Mary Linn also asked about the role of LAUC-SD buddies in assisting new librarians with the peer review process. There was consensus that our current program may not be robust enough to ensure that new librarians learn all they need to know about the process.
Peter Brueggeman mentioned that a greater role in the peer review workshop may not be enough. Written documentation available to the librarian and review initiator at the time of need will also be necessary.
Adolfo Tarango asked Harold if CAPA could give more feedback on the self-review section to librarians as part of CAPA procedures. Harold will relay this idea to the current CAPA membership, with acknowledgment that workload will certainly be an issue.
ACTION: The Board agreed to support a pilot project whereby LAUC-SD will take a greater role in the upcoming peer review workshop. Mary Linn, in consultation with the Board, will issue a call to the LAUC-SD membership for 1 to 2 volunteers with CAPA experience, to structure a peer review workshop that is balanced in terms of review file content and review process & policy. This ad hoc task force will be instructed to collaborate with LHR and CAPA in this pilot project.
Respectfully submitted,
Jeff Williams, Secretary 2004-2005