oct08b.indd the way I see it Kathleen A. Hanna, Ann O’Bryan, Kevin F. Petsche Our excellent adventure A somewhat irreverent look at how three tenure track librarians prepared their dossiers and lived to tell about it We are tenure track librarians at Indiana University–Purdue University Indianap olis (IUPUI) University Library who formed a “Dossier Support Group” to help 1) streamline the intensive tenure dossier writing process, 2) navigate the convoluted—and constantly changing—dossier preparation guidelines and routing procedures, and 3) provide mu tual support during the months leading up to the submission of our final documentation in the summer of 2007. We also bought weekly lottery tickets be cause, well, everybody needs a backup plan. Come together, right now We began the tenure track at the IUPUI Uni versity Library at approximately the same time and, as “classmates” discovered, we often had similar questions about writing our annual reviews, the thirdyear review (a sort of mini tenure dossier), and facets of the promotion and tenure (P&T) processes. Our informal discussions evolved into a more organized support group that met over lunch several times in the months leading up to our third year reviews; we found that our combined strengths were beneficial to all of us. We noted questions needing clarification, pooled our information resources (people, documents, etc.), and compared notes. Also, we found that just getting together created a supportive, encouraging environment. We reconstituted the support group in February 2007 as we prepared to tackle our tenure dossiers. Pros, cons Getting together gave us a chance to vent our frustrations and anxieties, find humor in the midst of stress, and just plain social ize. We decided right from the start to buy lottery tickets, contributing a dollar once or twice a week (the Hoosier Lottery has twiceweekly drawings). We were giddy with visions of striking it rich, being pro filed in the local media as “that group of librarians” who won millions, and retiring before having to complete and submit our dossiers. Being somewhat mathematically challenged, we knew our hopes for wealth were slim, especially since Kevin Petsche volunteered to purchase tickets and he’d never played the lottery in his life. The support group did have its draw backs. We were sometimes intimidated because everyone else’s accomplishments sounded so much more impressive than our own and, although we could share information and experiences, we could not actively collaborate on the actual writing of our dossiers. Sadly, we also lost one of our “classmates” to another academic library by midsummer. We thought this a rather extreme measure to take to avoid completing a dossier. If you can keep your wits about you Tenureseeking librarians on the IUPUI campus are required to adhere to the In Kathleen A. Hanna is professional programs/Center for Teaching and Learning assistant librarian, e-mail: kgreatba@iupui.edu, Ann O’Bryan is bibliographic and metadata services associate librarian, e-mail: aobr yan@iupui.edu, Kevin F. Petsche is head of acquisitions, e-mail: kpetsche@iupui.ed, at Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis © 2008 Kathleen A. Hanna, Ann O’Bryan, Kevin F. Petsche C&RL News October 2008 554 mailto:kpetsche@iupui.ed mailto:aobryan@iupui.edu mailto:kgreatba@iupui.edu diana University Purdue University India napolis Dean of the Faculties’ Guidelines for Preparing and Reviewing Promotion and Tenure Dossiers, reviewed and up dated annually by a campus committee, which normally has at least one librarian as a member. Due to the appointment of a new dean of faculties and multiple incon sistencies in the guidelines, the document was in continual flux during the months we were preparing our dossiers. The Guidelines attempt to separate criteria for teaching faculty and librarians, but inadequately addresses the very real distinctions between them. For example, teaching faculty are evaluated on “research, scholarship, and creative activity” versus the librarians’ “professional development” activities. Also, the format for the curricu lum vitae for librarians turned out to be our “best guess” as to how to satisfy the P&T committee’s requirements and still represent the complexity of a librarian’s accomplishments and contributions. In a sharp departure from previous procedures, the new IUPUI dean of facul ties wanted all dossiers to include solic ited letters from external reviewers from comparable institutions—a practice that is becoming routine, although generally these reviewers are paid an honorarium. Letters were also solicited from the deans of schools on the IUPUI campus to whom we three act as liaisons. The deans needed to pass this chore along to their colleagues, since we normally work with the teaching faculty of schools and departments, rather than the deans. To add to our shock and awe, the IU PUI librarians were debating whether to change dossier routing procedures to end the practice of sending our dossiers to an allcampus librarian review committee at the main campus in Bloomington (we’re tenured on our own campus only and not IU system wide). The routing procedure finally ended up as: • University Library Primary Peer Re view Committee • Team Leader (immediate supervisor) • IUPUI Librarians Promotion and Ten ure Committee • Dean of University Library Continued by the usual routing of all faculty dossiers: • Campus Promotion and Tenure Com mittee IUPUI Dean of Faculties • IUPUI Vice President/Chancellor • IU Office of the President • IU Board of Trustees We did have the option of submitting our dossiers under the Guidelines in effect at the time we received our appointment, but no one could fi nd them. It was at this point the Dossier Support Group decided it would hold its meetings across the street at the sports bar. One associate dean offered more helpful advice: focus on the content of the dossier that we could control and deal with format ting and other specific issues later. You can hide, but you can’t run All three of us have multiple team responsi bilities—which include instruction, supervi sion, technology, and special projects—so writing and compiling our dossiers was not an urgent “to do” item until we could no longer avoid it. The daily workload doesn’t grind to a halt simply because you have “just one more thing” to do. Our coping strategies included: • Understanding from the outset that this is by nature a drawn out, stressful, and normal event in a tenuretrack librarian’s career. It’s important to maintain (or adopt) positive habits that facilitate riding it out with health and humor intact. • Pooling questions about the dossier process, preparation guidelines and proto cols, and designating one group member to seek out the answers and report back at the next meeting or via email. • Investing heavily in prewriting prepa ration time to gather documentation (often October 2008 555 C&RL News scattered in folders and electronic fi les) and reread annual reviews from the past fi ve years. This often resulted in mutterings such as, “I don’t remember giving that conference presentation in ’02 . . . .” • Obtaining permission to read the suc cessful dossiers of previously tenured librar ians to get a feel for how people with varied position descriptions highlighted different aspects of their careers. • Chunking dossier content into smaller sections and tackling the easiest parts fi rst. This allowed us to work on some areas of our dossiers during short spans of time, as our schedules permitted. It proved especially helpful while writing our vitae and during the polishing phase of writing. • Temporarily cutting back on some ser vice or professional development activities, such as meetings or conferences that required outofstate travel. This proved fairly easy to do during the summer months. • Sequestering ourselves in our offi ces by blocking out full or half days on our calendars and selectively declining meetings, allowing phone calls to go to voice mail, and closing Outlook email. We were a tad miffed to discover that no one really seemed to notice we were missing. • Working from home. (Kevin Petsche excelled in this environment in which he communed with nature from his back porch, drank unlimited cups of coffee, and worked in his jammies.) Thank you for your support IUPUI libraries provide several support structures for newly appointed librarians as they begin their careers and move through the P&T process. We begin by identifying a mentor, who can be someone within our team department or library, or from outside our unit. Some of us found that a mentor outside our immediate team was more helpful in that we were con tinuously challenged to explain the choices we made for our activities along our career path. This helped to keep us focused on our professional visions. We are required to submit a formal annual review and a thirdyear cumulative review, which are immensely helpful in providing peer feedback and direction. It also allows us to stay in sync with our supervisor’s expectation of excellence in performance. The chairs of the University Library Primary Peer Review Committee and IUPUI Librarians Promotion and Tenure Committee are always available to answer questions on dossier con tent and formatting and the review process. Moreover, at least once a year, the IUPUI Librarians Promotion and Tenure Committee gives presentations on the P&T process and structuring the dossier. These workshops help keep us informed about changing expectations requirements as well as campus and university trends for our dossiers. That group of librarians: lessons learned • Don’t get so caught up in the require ments of daily job performance that you lose track of professional goals. It’s important to begin thinking about career direction and the dossier that will result at the end of the proba tionary period starting from Day One. • Take advantage of opportunities for feedback from colleagues. It’s natural for this evaluative process to feel intimidating, espe cially with so much riding on the outcome, but view the process as helpful, rather than punitive. Ask that such feedback be in writ ing. (This is also a professional courtesy that candidates should offer others.). • Don’t be shy about asking for feedback from teaching faculty in the form of letters and emails. Letters that specifi cally address the librarian’s contribution or a measurable impact are most useful. • Save all documentation that might be even remotely useful in building your case and keep it organized in one location. Anything having to do with job performance is obvious, but messages highlighting specifi c exemplary work or appreciation of professional service activities are also important. • Buy lottery tickets, because, well, you never know! C&RL News October 2008 556