Skip to main content
Indiana University
Minutes for June 18, 2007 Meeting

Attendees:
Representatives: Debra Denslaw (IUPUI), Karen Janke (IUPUI), Kirsten Leonard (IUK), Michael Maben (IUB), Robert Noel (IUB), Rick Ralston (IUPUI), Alison Stankrauff (IUSB), and Pat Steele (IUB).
Alternates: Gabrielle Carr (IUSE), Wendell Johnting (IUPUI)
Guests: Jim Baldwin (IUPUI), Lora Baldwin (IUE), Brenda Burk (IUPUI), Todd Daniels-Howell (IUPUI), Nancy Eckerman (IUPUI), Barb Gushrowski (IUPUI), Jennifer Hehman (IUPUI), Jaena Hollingsworth (IUPUI), Fran Huehls (IUPUI), David Lewis (IUPUI), Sue London (IUPUI), Chris Long (IUPUI), Sue McFadden (IUE), Ann OĄŻBryan (IUPUI), Virginia Sojdehei (IUB), Randi Stocker (IUPUI), Steve Towne (IUPUI), Beth Whipple (IUPUI), Karen Zimmerman (IUPUI).

The meeting was called to order at 3:01 pm.

Approval of the minutes--A motion was made by Leonard and seconded by Stankrauff to approve the February 28, 2006 minutes as distributed. Motion carried.

Dean Pat Steele was not present at the start of the meeting. The Council had a brief discussion of the proposed promotion and tenure dossier routing with Carr asking about the timeline and representation of the group that would study the issues and make recommendations. It was decided that we needed Dean Steele present to discuss this issue, so it was tabled until the Dean arrived.

Then the Council discussed the Academic Handbook revisions. Leonard asked about the lack of the balanced case in the suggested language. It was decided that we would wait for Dean Steele's arrival to discuss this issue as well.

IULFC website and intranet sites - Maben reported on the survey that Kwang conducted of the IULFC website and intranet. Kwang found that the website was more complete and had more current information. Maben reported that his personal preference was the website over the intranet due to the need to use Internet Explorer and login in to use the intranet. It was asked if there was anything confidential that needed to be behind a login. No one could think of anything that was confidential. It was also asked who had the responsibility of updating the intranet. Sojdehei stated that it was shared responsibility. The Council did not object to focusing our documentation and information on the website.

At this point, Dean Steele arrived at the meeting and the Council returned to the tabled issues.

Promotion and Tenure dossier routing

Maben distributed a memo to the Council on Friday, June 15th giving a report of the discussion at Librarians' Day on June 1st, along with the vote that was taken by the library faculty on an interim solution for the coming academic year (see attached memo).

Dean Steele then reported to the Council that she had a brief discussion with Maben and others after the Librarians' Day discussion. The Dean stated that she wants to appoint a small group with representation across the state to study the issues and make recommendations to the new Dean of Libraries and the library faculty. We will wait until the new Dean is in place to have the open forums discussing the proposals. Maben then asked for a motion by the Council to move forward as proposed and approved by the library faculty. Stankrauff moved and Noel seconded. The motion carried.

Academic Handbook revisions

Maben distributed a memo to the Council on Monday, June 18th detailing the discussion at LibrariansĄŻ Day along with the one proposal that he received via email (see attached memo). The dominate comments from LibrariansĄŻ Day was to make the Academic Handbook language more general and less specific. David Lewis had suggested that the language be patterned after the sections for the teaching faculty. The Council then discusses whether it was appropriate to send this issue back to the IULFC Faculty Standards Committee or a different group. Dean Steele suggested appointing a small group to examine the language and make recommendations. The Dean said she would ask for volunteers to fill the committee. Jennifer Hehman at IUPUI then volunteered for the committee. Dean Steele thanked Hehman for volunteering and she said she would seek additional volunteers.

Dean's report

Dean's search: We have had two candidates in so far, with two more this week: Catherine Murray-Rust and Barbara Dewey. President-elect Michael McRobbie hopes to have the position filled by the July Board of Trustees meeting. The position of Provost for the Bloomington campus should be decided this week.

ALF 2: Has been approved and is on the fast track. The University has pulled together the original ALF 1 team to work on ALF 2. The construction phase should take about one year (after the plans and money are all in place).

University Archives: They have moved out of Bryan Hall to ALF 1. No word yet on what will happen to the space in Bryan Hall.

Librarians' Day: We had an excellent discussion about the current issues the IU Libraries are facing and Dean Steele hopes the discussion continues.

Budgets: Bloomington a little better this year. David Lewis checked on the budgets for the regional campuses and they are poor. IUB has been selected for a Google project with some of the special collections that are still to be determined. Ralston asked if the project just included IUB. Dean Steele said yes, just the CIC flagship campus libraries.

Maben then complemented the Librarians' Day Committee for their hard work and excellent job they did with Librarians' Day.

The meeting was then adjourned at 3:50 pm.

Respectfully submitted -

Michael Maben

IULFC Secretary

2006/2007

Memo #1

To: IULFC
From: Michael Maben, Secretary
Memo: Discussion of Promotion and Tenure-IULFC Meeting, June 18, 2007
Date: June 15, 2007

Promotion and Tenure discussion - Librarians' Day, June 1, 2007

Five questions formed the foundation of the discussion-

  1. What does it mean to be an IU Library Faculty member?
  2. What are the core values of an IU Library Faculty member?
  3. How do we balance demands between the system requirements and campus demands?
  4. Who owns the promotion and tenure process for IU Librarians?
  5. Given the changes, how best should the changes be implemented?
The discussion was active with many opinions expressed by the librarians. My notes indicate that many people felt that we need the shared promotion and tenure values to bind us together as a library faculty, but that each campus is so unique we need to look at these administrative changes. Some individuals were opposed to losing an overall libraries promotion and tenure committee. Eventually the discussion focused on the IULFC and its role and authority, with some expressing the view that the IULFC needs to be examined and possibly restructured. The session closed with Dean Pat Steele stating that the IUPUI librarians have voted to keep their dossiers on the IUPUI campus and 2 chancellors have agreed to this arrangement.

I came away from the session with the opinion that most IU librarians that were present want to keep the common standards for promotion and tenure, but that many also felt that dossiers should remain on the individual campuses and not go to an overall P&T committee. However, there were a number of librarians who took the opposite view that we need to have a system-wide P&T committee to maintain our core values.

During the week of June 4th, a memo and vote request went out to the librarians asking if they would approve having IUPUI not route their dossiers this coming academic year through the IULFC P&T Committee, but that also their 3 representatives remain as members of the P&T Committee. It was emphasized that this was an interim solution and that a study would be conducted to examine the broader issues and make recommendations for changes. The vote (as of 4 PM on Friday, June 15th) has been 70 in favor and 23 opposed. A number of the no votes have stated to me that they approve having IUPUI dossiers not routing through the IULFC P&T Committee, but that if this occurs then IUPUI should not have any representation on the IULFC P&T Committee. With a 3-1 margin in favor of what was proposed, it is my opinion that we should proceed in this manner.

Michael Maben
IULFC Secretary

Memo #2

To: IULFC
From: Michael Maben, Secretary
Memo: Discussion of the Academic Handbook revisions
Date: June 15, 2007

Academic Handbook revision discussion-Librarians' Day, June 1, 2007

In the opening session at Librarians' Day, we discussed the proposed revisions to the Academic Handbook sections for librarians. Many librarians felt that the proposed language was too specific for the Academic Handbook, and the language should be made more general. David Lewis suggested building the language for the librarian sections around the updated faculty sections.

I received one e-mail suggested revision to the Academic Handbook-it is copied below.

Dear Michael and Pat and David,

I propose making the following revisions to the Academic Handbook: look at the out dated entry on page 66 , Procedures for Librarians . first column. This process as described/mandated on page 66 has not been followed in practice at IU Libraries since 1982-as far as I can tell- Maybe Pat or someone at Bloomington can remember if the Bloomington Chancellor reviewed all tenure dossiers for Librarians in the 1970's before they went to the System wide Librarians committee-then to the Dean of the Libraries for presentation to the BOT [Board of Trustees]?.

I submit the three paragraphs below (which are parallel to faculty procedures approved by BOT June 20, 1991 on page 65) to replace the entire section which was approved by BOT, June 30, 1972 and has not been updated since---- with the following:

Procedures for Librarians. Recommendations for advancement to tenured status for librarians are prepared by Team leaders, supervisors or other appropriate administrative officers. Such recommendations are prepared early in the academic year which counts as the sixth year for purposes of reckoning years of service towards tenure. (The actual determination of the appropriate year includes credit for service at other institutions which may have been negotiated at the time of the first appointment.)

Recommendations shall be submitted through the academic administration of each campus with the advice of Librarian committees and appropriate professional peers. Administrative structure varies somewhat from campus to campus and among library units on each campus. For specific information on the routing of such recommendations, see the I.U. Library Faculty Handbook and campus-specific documents. Campus vice presidents, chancellors, and library deans, with the advice of librarian committees, are responsible for submitting tenure recommendations to the President. It shall be the responsibility of the President to submit to the Board of Trustees the names of those recommended for advancement to the tenured status.

The dossier constructed in consultation with the candidate provides the evidence upon which the tenure decision is to be made. If additional information is sought or received during the review of the dossier at any level, the candidate and all previous committees and reviewers must be notified and given the opportunity to respond to the additional information. The information and the responses shall then become part of the dossier.

Submitted, June 4, 2007,

Jennifer L. Hehman, M.A. , M.L.S.
Associate Librarian, promoted and tenured '88
LAM Team, University Library, IUPUI