LCPT Meetings Record 2020-2021

April 26, 2021 (10:00-11:10)

Zoom meeting

Present: Jamene Brooks-Kieffer (Chair), Geoff Husic, Michiko Ito (Secretary), Amalia Monroe- Gulick, Betsaida M. Reyes

Committee meeting. See: “LCPT Meeting Minutes April 26, 2021.”

November 30, 2020 (1:00-2:00)

Zoom meeting

Present: Jamene Brooks Kieffer (Chair), Geoff Husic, Michiko Ito (Secretary), Amalia Monroe- Gulick, Betsaida M. Reyes, Elspeth E. Healey (LFA Exec Liaison), Mike Broadwell (HR)

Committee meeting. See: “LCPT Meeting Minutes November 30, 2020.”

November 16, 2020 (9:00-10:30)

Zoom meeting

Present: Jamene Brooks Kieffer (Chair), Geoff Husic, Michiko Ito (Secretary), Amalia Monroe- Gulick, Betsaida M. Reyes

Committee meeting. We reviewed and approved the final drafts. We made online anonymous vote. We also discussed the Special Charge 1, assigned by LFA on the appropriateness of sharing the files prepared by previous PT candidates and other broader issues. See “LCPT Meeting Minutes November 16, 2020.”

October 30, 2020 (9:00-10:30)

Zoom meeting

Present: Jamene Brooks Kieffer (Chair), Geoff Husic, Michiko Ito (Secretary), Amalia Monroe- Gulick, Betsaida M. Reyes

Committee meeting. We reviewed the second draft and made comments on: Professional Performance, Research, and Service. We agreed to cancel the 11/5 meeting but will work via online and complete the three draft and be ready to vote at the 11/16 meeting. The chair will draft the letter to the Dean and any other required letters/summaries on or before 11/16.

October 23, 2020 (9:00-10:30)

Zoom meeting

Present: Jamene Brooks Kieffer (Chair), Geoff Husic, Michiko Ito (Secretary), Amalia Monroe- Gulick, Betsaida M. Reyes

Committee meeting. We reviewed the first draft and made comments on: Professional Performance, Research, and Service. We are going to review the second draft on October 30. The drafts should be submitted by October 29 noon.

October 13, 2020 (1:00-2:30)

Zoom meeting

Present: Jamene Brooks Kieffer (Chair), Geoff Husic, Michiko Ito (Secretary), Amalia Monroe- Gulick, Betsaida M. Reyes

Committee Meeting. See “LCPT Meeting Minutes October 13, 2020.”

August 31, 2020 (3:00-4:00)

Zoom meeting

Present: Josh Bolick, Ada Emmett, Michiko Ito, Amalia Monroe-Gulick, Brian Rosenblum Ad Hoc review with the candidate, mentor and supervisor

August 28, 2020 (9:00-10:00)

Zoom meeting

Present: Michiko Ito, Amalia Monroe-Gulick

Preparation for Ad Hoc meeting with the candidate

August 3, 2020 (10:00-11:00)

Zoom meeting

Present: Jamene Brooks Kieffer (Chair), Geoff Husic, Michiko Ito (Secretary), Amalia Monroe- Gulick, Betsaida M. Reyes, Elspeth E. Healey (LFA Exec Liaison)

Committee Meeting. See “LCPT Meeting Minutes August 3, 2020.”

2020-2021 Library Committee on Promotion and Tenure (LCPT)

Meeting Minutes/Notes

August 3, 2020 (10:00-11:00)

Zoom meeting

Present: Jamene Brooks Kieffer (Chair), Geoff Husic, Michiko Ito (Secretary), Amalia Monroe- Gulick, Betsaida M. Reyes, Elspeth E. Healey (LFA Exec Liaison)

Introduction:

Jamene: Chair, 3rd year

Michiko: Secretary, 3rd year, Ad-Hoc Review Advisor Geoff: Outgoing Chair, 3rd year

Betsaida: 1st year

Amalia: Ad-Hoc Reviewer, 2nd year Elspeth: LFA Exec Liaison

Standing and Special Charges Special charges for 2020-2021

Healey shared the special charges assigned to LCPT and asked to bring questions and concerns to LFA. These charges were based on the LCPT’s FY20 report.

  • Special Charge 1. Discuss appropriateness of Libraries HR putting out a general voluntary call to past candidates to “opt in” to sharing their files (candidate-prepared documents only) as examples to help new candidates in preparing their files. LCPT’s discussions should consider potential legal/personnel problems and HR’s responsibility for keeping track of permissions.

LFA needs the LCPT’s final recommendation by January 2021 so that if LCPT recommends this voluntary call, LFA can promptly act and make the volunteer files ready for the next year’s candidates to review.

  • Sharing individual promotion dossiers may get involved in legal/personnel issues, so when discussing this issue, it is better to include Mike Broadwell who can input HR perspectives.
  • Do other departments do this, and if so, face any problems?
  • LFA stresses this call is voluntary. If implemented, this “opt in” call should not create any pressure on the past candidates.
  • Maybe some people may want to offer only to specific people, rather than sharing with anyone interested. General “opt in” may create uncomfortable situation because some past candidates may be willing to share their files only with specific individuals.
  • On the other hand, sending library-wide, general call may be better than asking specific individuals to share their files.
  • Should we do this (sharing file) informal basis rather than officially implementing.
  • What is the value of this call? --- It may be extremely intimidating to make the promotion document from the scratch. Reviewing the files created by past candidates may help them to effectively prepare the documents.
  • Procedures/criteria continue to change, so reviewing older files may not be so helpful?
  • Special Charge 2. Based on the 2019-2020 LFSA Web Taskforce Final Report and in consultation with the LFSA webmaster, LCPT should review and recommend procedures for archiving and accessing LCPT documents from previous years. This charge is partly coming from the report by the LFSA Task Force; documents on SharePoint are not automatically saved in the University Archive while previous intranet and library’s public website are automatically archived. Also, at least one of the previous LCPT annual report is missing. The goal is to have all public facing documents in the same locations with those by other governance committees. So LCPT needs to coordinate with the webmaster to archive the documents. LFA needs LCPT’s recommendation by the end of the current term.
  • It was not clear what kind of documents should be archived. Many documents LCPT deal with should be confidential and cannot be archived.
  • LCPT in the past excluded confidential notes and only kept general notes, such as who attended the meeting and what discussed, etc. Those notes were summarized and included in the annual report.
  • The purpose of archiving is not clear to LCPT members. For other committees, reviewing previous notes may be helpful, but this committee’s notes are generic if all confidential information is excluded.
  • Does anyone do paper archiving now?---In some cases paper works were created and sent to the University Archives, but not in recent days. Healey can make an inquiry. Becky and Molly, archivists, about the desire for and past practice about paper archive. Process?
  • In some sections in the Libraries paper archives sent to the University archive.
  • LFA Exec Liaison is going to:
    • Confirm who is the LFSA webmaster;
    • Clarify what documentations they have in mind;
    • Ask the university archivists about the practice/procedures of paper archiving.
  • Clarification from Healey on 08/05/20: “Just to clarify, LFA is not asking that any confidential materials be archived as part of the charge related to the web and documentation (it covers only documents that are able to be public-facing, such as the minutes you’ve just shared, final reports, etc.).”

 

LCPT Storage Locations and Considerations (Brooks Kieffer)

  • Communicating committee business
    • Any committee business that is communicated over e-mail should include everyone.

Do not conduct committee business outside of the full committee

  • Ad-Hoc review may be excluded from this rule.
  • OneDrive
    • The candidate’s file will be shared via OneDrive.
  • O:\drive (LPAT)
    • LCPT member should be able to get access to the LCPT’s committee file in O Drive. If not accessible, report to the Chair.
    • Use VPN to get access to O Drive from home.
  • Confidentiality of notes and processes
    • All confidential documents should be securely shredded.
      • Better to separate notes for LCPT from all other committee related notes to avoid potential compromise.
    • All confidential information, conversations, etc., should not be included in the minutes.

Ad Hoc Review process (Monroe-Gulick and all)

  • Ad-Hoc Meeting is scheduled on Aug. 31, 2020. Monroe-Gulick and Ito will attend. The candidate’s supervisor and mentor will also be in the meeting.
    • Ad-Hoc review usually focus on technical issues, but feel free to add more advice to guide through this process.
    • The candidate requested LCPT to provide Ad-Hoc review notes in advance to the meeting. However, Ad-Hoc reviewers may not have enough time. LCPT feels it unnecessary to provide the Ad-Hoc review notes in advance to the Ad-Hoc meeting.
    • Candidate has enough time (3-4 weeks) to revise the document before the final deadline and can come back to the Ad-Hoc reviewer for further questions.
    • Ad-Hoc reviewer should prioritize recommendations so that the candidate can see which issues are outstanding and needs revisions.
    • There is a checklist for Ad-Hoc review in O Drive (“AdHoc_SuggestionsChecklistTemplate.docx” under “Ad-Hoc review” folder)
    • To conduct the Zoom Ad-Hoc meeting effectively if candidate documents are printed and marked up by hand, the marked-up documents with review notes should be scanned and uploaded to One Drive and share with the candidate, supervisor and mentor.

Questions and Other Business (all)

No other business or questions at this time.

 

2020-2021 Library Committee on Promotion and Tenure (LCPT)

Meeting Minutes/Notes

October 13, 2020 (1:00-2:30)

Zoom meeting

Present: Jamene Brooks Kieffer (Chair), Geoff Husic, Michiko Ito (Secretary), Amalia Monroe- Gulick, Betsaida M. Reyes, Elspeth E. Healey (LFA Exec Liaison)

Scheduled Meetings for P&T discussions

Brooks Kieffer reviewed the meeting schedules and P&T due dates. Later we revised the meeting schedules.

1. 2020/10/13 - Tuesday 1:00-2:30

2. 2020/10/19 - Monday 9:00-10:30 (Some will use this time for reviewing their drafts) 3. 2020/10/23 - Friday 9:00-10:30

4.   2020/10/30 - Friday 9:00-10:30

5.   2020/11/05 - Thursday 2:00-3:30

6.   2020/11/16 - Monday 9:00-10:30

P&T Due Dates:

  • 2020/11/30 - LCPT report due to Dean Smith
  • 2020/12/14 - Dean meets with candidate this week
  • 2020/12/21 - Dean’s report due to Provost’s Office

 

Agenda:

  1. Confirm access to file; questions about the file? Everyone was able to get access to the file.
  2. Straw poll

Each member participated to the straw poll

  1. Open discussion
  2. Writing assignments

Each member received writing assignment.

  1. Due dates for drafts

Move 10/19 meeting to later in November First draft due: October 22 by noon:

First draft should be saved in One Drive

Each member will read the drafts to be ready to comments during the 10/23 meeting

 

2020-2021 Library Committee on Promotion and Tenure (LCPT)

Meeting Minutes/Notes

November 16 (9:00-10:30)

Zoom meeting

Present: Jamene Brooks Kieffer (Chair), Geoff Husic, Michiko Ito (Secretary), Amalia Monroe- Gulick, Betsaida M. Reyes

LCPT reviewed and approved the final drafts of the P&T candidate. We made online anonymous vote. We also discussed the Special Charge 1, assigned by LFA as well as broader issues.

Special Charge 1:

Discuss appropriateness of Libraries HR putting out a general voluntary call to past candidates to “opt in” to sharing their files (candidate-prepared documents only) as examples to help new candidates in preparing their files. LCPT’s discussions should consider potential legal/personnel problems and HR’s responsibility for keeping track of permissions.

Background

The idea of sharing files of the previous candidates came up when LCPT found some problematic files in the past. LCPT felt the individual candidates would really need some direction.

Discussion on Special Charge

Call to “opt in” “opt out” would make the PT candidates feel easier to access to the sample files. However, LCPT feels skeptical about blanket sharing without clarity on permission, scope, duration, etc.

  • Former candidates may feel it uncomfortable to share their files unrestrictive way;
  • Former candidates may feel it comfortable if sharing is one-to-one, limited time;
  • Some sample files may get outdated as the PT templates, criteria, procedures, etc., may change;
  • The scope of job responsibilities varies, so the sample file may not be the best one to help the candidate;
  • LCPT does not want to standardize the contents of the candidate’s file by providing sample files. Although the process is highly structured, within that structure, candidates are expected to present themselves;
  • Sharing via Sharing Point may be unreliable;
  • HR may feel uncomfortable to be the custodian of these documents.

Therefore, LCPT feels appropriate to explore more facilitated ways of individual, restricted sharing. For example:

  • HR puts out call for volunteers for file sharing for the calendar year;
  • (HR or LCPT?) makes a call for file sharing at the Open Meeting in May, held by HR.
  • Accompanying short description about the contents should help the candidate to decide if the file is a good sample for them.

Broader Issues and Questions

LCPT is not responsible for creating or improving their files. However, LCPT feels it necessary to encourage pre-tenure faculty to start preparing their promotion files earlier (making conference records, things accomplished, prepare philosophical statement) and start to make connection with someone who can share their files.

The Scope and Mandatoriness of the Open Meeting

  • Is it possible to make it mandate to attend the Open Meeting from the first year (like K- State) with supervisor and mentor (if identified)?
  • P&T is part of HR; LCPT is invited;
  • Hold a workshop by LCPT in addition to the open meeting?
    • In that case, how to hold the workshop online?
    • Adding another layer of work on LCPT?
  • Make the open meeting more informative?
    • Focus on contents, rather than process?
    • Get feedback from the candidates about their experiences to learn what information would be useful.

Mentor Program to Prepare Promotion Files (or Other Ways to Help Pre-Tenure Candidates)

  • Mentors could meet and talk about their role or range of experiences around this process. Mentors are important, particularly for pre-tenure candidates.
  • Mentor program is not stable enough to support the promotion procedures; i.e., Mentors may retire, or mentors/mentees may change. Also, mentors may or may not get involved in the promotion procedures. Explore ways to optimize/strengthen the mentor program? How can this (and other “safety net”) be more visible Bring this up to LFA?
  • Should LCPT create a mentoring tip sheet (like the one created for candidates and supervisors)?

LCPT Tip Sheets

  • Tips created by LCPT needs to be updated more frequently. What to be included may be varied by committee members, however (for example, which metrics should be or should not be on there. Also, sample cover sheets)

Position of LCPT

  • To what extent are we purely evaluators and to what extent are we also slash advocates for the candidates?

LCPT will have a meeting on 11/30 to continue this discussion with Mike Broadwell (HR) and Elspeth Healey (LFA Exec Liaison)

 

2020-2021 Library Committee on Promotion and Tenure (LCPT)

Meeting Minutes/Notes

November 30 (1:00-2:00)

Zoom meeting

Present: Jamene Brooks-Kieffer (Chair), Geoff Husic, Michiko Ito (Secretary), Amalia Monroe- Gulick, Betsaida M. Reyes, Elspeth Healey (LFA Exec Liaison), Mike Broadwell (Guest, HR)

LCPT continued 2020/11/16 discussion with Healey and Broadwell. The Chair provided a brief on the 2020/11/16 discussion: Special charge 1 (text available at the bottom) and strengthening support system for pre-tenured faculty. The questions below, based on the meeting, were provided in today’s agenda:

AGENDA

  • What is the HR position on being responsible for keeping and sharing specific sample P&T files?
  • Ability to make the P&T Open Meeting mandatory for pre-tenure faculty early in their appointment?
  • Ability to augment the existing content of the P&T Open Meeting?
  • Thoughts on a P&T-specific workshop in addition to the open meeting?
  • If not LCPT, who would organize and run this workshop?
  • A role for LFA/LFA Exec in strengthening the P&T mentoring program?

 

Discussion on Special Charge 1 (text of Charge 1 at the bottom of this minutes) Perspectives from HR (Broadwell):

  • File sharing has been done informally. He provided two examples. First, a faculty member was willing to share any part of the file she created. Rather than sharing the submitted document (which was confidential), he suggested the candidate to contact the faculty member to see her personal copy. Second, he obtained permissions from the previous candidates and combined their submitted files to create a sample. By deleting the names of the candidates and other personal information, he made the sample generic, though it was still possible to figure out who originally created the documents.
  • He is reluctant to be a caretaker of someone’s confidential files; he would have to work with each volunteer to identify which part is OK to share. It would be easier for the faculty to share files with the candidates by themselves. On the other hand, he can provide some assistance, such as giving the candidates with those who are willing to share their personal files or advise file layouts, ideas, etc. However, as an HR person, he cannot judge whose files work best for particular candidate. More effective assistance can be and should be provided by the mentors/supervisors. In this regard, developing mentor network can help the idea of sharing files informal way.
  • He is super cautious about being an entity in the Dean’s Office that’s sharing these files. He brought attention to the statement on confidentiality in the “Faculty Senate Rules and Regulations (FARR)”, Article VII, Section 2 (https://policy.ku.edu/governance/FSRR#art7sect2) , though this allowed for some room for someone to sign off on getting access to these files.
  • He also suggested it could be possible for LCPT to combine several files and make an anonymous sample.

LFA Exec’s clarification regarding the Special Charge 1 (Healey):

  • Regarding FARR, LFA Exec did not specifically reference to the University’s governance document.
  • The charge was created based on the recommendation submitted by the previous LCPT. LFA gives LCPT the space and the opportunity to explore ways LCPT thinks the best suited, whether to continue an informal way or developing a more formal structure for sharing files.

Open Discussion on Charge 1.

  • Maintaining the informal network is the safest way. Once the PT file is submitted to HR, it is officially part of the faculty member’s personnel record and it does fall under section 2 of the FARR.
  • If HR is responsible for hosting “sample” documents and if they get to a candidate, then HR needs to rely on the candidate’s ability to keep those documents secure. If something happens, then HR still takes responsibility. If faculty volunteers informally share their personal copies with candidates, security issue would be handled at the personal level.
  • HR feels uncomfortable to do match making since HR does not know whose works and researches are most closely related to the candidates.
  • However, HR can call for volunteers who can share their files and by adding this call to SharePoint calendar, this can be done annually.

Conversation Summary:

Regarding the Special Charge 1, the Committee is leaning away from “opt-in” “opt-out” call to share official files. Instead, HR can make an automated annual “opt-in” call and make a list of volunteers (with the date of production/status). Volunteers, upon request, share their personal copies one-to- one basis.

How to Support P&T Candidates Open Meeting

  • Who is hosting the open meeting has been varied, though in recent years, hosting responsibility has been veered over to HR. However, HR’s responsibility is to facilitate the P&T process, but not the contents of submitted files. For example, in the university-level open meeting, many questions are such contents related question as the relations between the candidate and external reviewers. HR cannot answer such questions.
  • When discussing how to support candidates, it is necessary to separate HR process and contents of the file (to discuss sharing responsibilities). HR and LCPT need to clarify their responsibilities.
  • This meeting did not discuss further regarding the contents of the open meeting or making the attendance to the meeting mandatory for new hires (and supervisors and mentors)
  • Creating a structure to provide educational opportunities would be helpful for those involved in the P&T process. The ad hoc workshop on writing external review, organized last year, was helpful. Yet such opportunities have not been an organized effort. Also, it is not clear which group should be responsible.
  • LCPT may create recommendations to LFA in its annual report.

Mentoring Program

  • New faculty has hard time finding a mentor in his/her early career, though it is important to establish relationships with a mentor before P&T process really starts.
  • The existing mentoring program/network is neither systematic nor consistent. Names are suggested to new hires but matching seems to happen haphazardly and mentor-mentee relation is really up to them.
  • The mentoring program gets even weaker or disappeared for tenured faculty. Mentors may be retired or leave for other institutions, but tenured faculty still need help to go through promotion process to go up to full.
  • LFA has not discussed mentoring program. LCPT may include recommendations on this matter (and other ideas) in its annual report to support P&T candidates. Recommendations may include setting up an ad hoc committee for investigation.
  • HR put Sharon Riley in charge of orientation program. She created a group of potential orientation mentors (not P&T mentors) and goes through the list of people with new hires.
  • To strengthen the mentor program, add P&T related advice by LCPT in SharePoint calendar which can send automatic reminders to mentors/new faculty?

The Role of Supervisors and Annual Evaluations

  • What role the annual evaluation can play in the P&T process? The evaluation should provide important feedback to improve the candidate’s P&T file. Clarify the role of the supervisor in the P&T process?

Concerns on SharePoint Security

There are some concerns regarding the security on SharePoint, but not specific problem was identified during this meeting. However, LCPT members noticed that older P&T documents were still accessible. HR is going to update the permission and control the access to the confidential files.

Text of Special Charge 1

Discuss appropriateness of Libraries HR putting out a general voluntary call to past candidates to “opt in” to sharing their files (candidate-prepared documents only) as examples to help new candidates in preparing their files. LCPT’s discussions should consider potential legal/personnel problems and HR’s responsibility for keeping track of permissions.

2020-2021 Library Committee on Promotion and Tenure (LCPT)

Meeting Minutes/Notes

April 26 (10:00-11:10)

Zoom meeting

Present: Jamene Brooks-Kieffer (Chair), Geoff Husic, Michiko Ito (Secretary), Amalia Monroe- Gulick, Betsaida M. Reyes

LCPT discussed Special Charge 2:

Based on the 2019-2020 LFSA Web Taskforce Final Report and in consultation with the LFSA webmaster, LCPT should review and recommend procedures for archiving and accessing LCPT documents from previous years.

Background:

KU Libraries started to use Sharepoint without clear guidance what to (or not to) be posted there; this caused disruptions and many committee reports were lost or not promptly accessible, creating difficulty to carry over committee memories. While LFSA has been salvaging missing files, they found it necessary to codify mechanism to archive the records of activities of past committees.

Clarification from the Chair:

  • Regarding “accessing LCPT documents from previous years,” LCPT’s previous annual reports are archived and available to view at the LCPT web page; there is no missing period:
  • Documents to be posted to the LFSA/LCPT website should be submitted to LFSA Webmaster (https://kansas.sharepoint.com/teams/lib/collaboration/lfsawebmaster). This is a place for the committee moving forward to place their documents. The documents will be published in the public facing website.

Agreement:

The Committee discussed what documents were to be archived and agreed to archive the following core documents:

  • Annual reports
  • Membership
  • Minutes
  • Supplemental documents related to the annual report (e.g., documents produced for special charges)

Open Questions:

During the discussion, the Committee identified the following problems.

  • LCPT has several places to store documents to the library and to the public: Sharepoint (as a replacement for the library intranet) and above-mentioned public facing LFSA/LCPT website. The information available in these locations are duplicated, which confuses the current committee members as well as PT&PTTR candidates.
  • Documents under “Additional Resources” in LFSA/LCPT website should be updated, but it is advisable to keep old documents so that future LCPT committee to trace when/how changes occurred. However, keeping them in the public location would confuse PT&PTTR candidates.
  • Relating to this, past copies may be archived during the archival web crawl, but LCPT does not know how often “Archive-It” is crawling the LFSA websites.
  • LCPT has been using O:\ to save confidential documents, although the current committee heavily relies on One Drive due to remote working. However, permissions to O:\ have been problematic in the past, accidentally allowing new members to access to the previous committee’s confidential documents.
  • There is no documentation on when and what to be deleted from O:\. After official documents are submitted, all evaluation related documents (both in print and in e-format) should be discarded, but no clear date is given. As unwritten practice, the past chair cleaned old documents in spring semester to make O:\ ready for the new membership. Rather than relying on cultural knowledge, this procedure should be documented as a responsibility of the committee chair.
  • Although remained documents in O:\ are relevant to the current committee’s tasks, they are not well organized and easily accessible.

Action Items

  • Chair will contact Sabbatical Leave & Post-Tenure Review Committee (SLPTR) to have a joint meeting with other concerned people: Erin (LFA Secretary), Michelle (LFSA Webmaster), Elspeth (LFA-LCPT Liaison), Scott (LFA-SLPTR Liaison)
  • Chair will list Chair’s duties, which include file management and file deletion schedule. Chair will contact past LCPT committee chairs for assistance.
  • All: O:\Directory Document Project. Reorganize files in O:\ and create directories to provide future committee members with easier access to these documents. Chair will place a README file for instruction. which contain templates to create documentation for the directories and files in the drive. This includes deleting unneeded files, moving to other locations, renaming headings, etc.