Our evaluation form is simple in nature; Part A asks we evaluate our contributions to the library mission and vision over the last year and Part B asks for a listing of goals for the upcoming year. When faced with a blank evaluation form following the completion of my first year of work, I quickly broke Part A into two easy to use sub-parts, goals for the current year and statements of goals fulfilled. This enabled me to pick out the things from my yearly "to do" list that best suited the evaluation (something I still do). For the last five years I have used the same seven goals, tweaking them somewhat as the year necessitated. My yearly review generally runs between four to six pages (really). This year it was five pages, single-spaced with use of numbering, bullet points, and italics. The seven points I cover include:
- Being a team member
- Working with the college of education
- Resource center collection development
- Resource center web page
- Library web master
- Professional development
- Manage the resource center
Every year I learn something new during my review conference and this year was no exception, unless you count the fact that I learned two thing. Following two years of describing in detail library web master duties as actually a second full time job, it was noted by my boss that he realizes how much work I do on the web page - and - that I was not hired to do the job. It will not get me any more money, but the recognition on his part is a step forward. The second thing I learned is no matter how open the communication lines are with my boss, there are always things that fall under the radar. Consequently, my ever present list and lengthy self-evaluation document serve a purpose. All things considered, though the evaluation process is time consuming and fraught with stress, it is a golden opportunity to update my resume, CV, and professional portfolio.
Bottom line? I am done for another year and patiently waiting for contract renewal.