[12405] in Public-Access_Computer_Systems_Forum
Criteria for evaluating e-documents in (re)appointment and promotion
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Birdie MacLennan)
Wed Sep 2 20:03:23 1998
Date: Wed, 02 Sep 1998 12:55:19 -0500
From: Birdie MacLennan <bmaclenn@zoo.uvm.edu>
To: PACS-L@LISTSERV.UH.EDU
Reply-To: Birdie MacLennan <bmaclenn@zoo.uvm.edu>
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
Greetings,
I've recently been appointed to an inhouse ad hoc committee that is an
offshoot of our Library Faculty Standards Committee. The ad hoc group is
charged with considering "where and how responsibilities for authoring,
editing or publishing electronic documents and other forms of electronic
communications fit into established guidelines for the appointment,
reappointment, and promotion."
The other item that we are charged with is "ways to address the relative
weight of credit derived from multiple authorship of a document or a
project."
I'm wondering if other academic librarians -- particularly those with
faculty status -- have considered either or both of these issues and found
ways to incorporate them into documentation that provides guidelines for
library faculty members when they are preparing dossiers for reappointment
or promotion? If you have some documentation in place, would you be
willing to share it?
Please reply to me or to the list, if your response is of general
interest.
Thanks in advance for any insights. -- Birdie
_______
| |
)* | Birdie MacLennan http://www.uvm.edu/~bmaclenn/sig.html
/ / Bailey/Howe Library E-mail: BMacLenn@zoo.uvm.edu
) | University of Vermont Phone: 802-656-2016
| | Burlington, VT 05405, USA Fax: 802-656-4038
|__| Library Assoc. Prof. ; Coordinator, Serials & Cataloging, etc....
