The Academic Senate has under review proposed changes in the criteria for the hiring and promotion of librarians.* Accompanying the document on the changes is an explanation which frankly strains credibility.
We are asked to believe that in 2016, nine years ago, someone made some transcription errors which nobody noticed or thought to fix until now. And we are asked to believe that the changes proposed now are just corrections of what was really meant. But the transcription errors go way beyond mere typos. They appear to be substantive in nature.
Below is one example of a supposed correction of one such transcription error being proposed for correction:
...In APM - 360-4(d), “carrying out research and creative activity” in support of the professional services performed in the libraries has been modified to “acquiring information and knowledge” in support of the professional services performed in the libraries. The original Librarian definition referenced “research where necessary” and the Joint Task Force’s original proposed definition referenced “research in support” of the professional services performed in the libraries. However, when APM - 360 was issued in 2016, the reference to “research” was erroneously expanded to “carrying out research and creative activity” in support of the professional services performed in the libraries.
The research/creative activity mission of the University is not a subcategory under the broader category of professional library services, which is how the current policy reads. The substitution of “acquiring information and knowledge” for “carrying out research and creative activity” is intended to clarify this because the use of the word “research” in the original version of APM - 360 resulted in a misunderstanding of the intent of the word and was inadvertently expanded to include “creative activity.” ...
One does not accidentally change "research in support" to "carrying out research and creative activity." And there are more such purported "accidents" in the document.
There has to be a back story here. But it isn't being told. It should be told.
Comments are due by June 17th: SystemwideAP-PolicyReviewComments@ucop.edu
====
*The full document is at: https://senate.universityofcalifornia.edu/_files/underreview/systemwide-senate-review-apm-360-3-20-25.pdf.
No comments:
Post a Comment