CERTIDoc Consortium
European System of certification of information professionals
Evaluation Guide
2004
Original version: French
Final version of 28 May 2004
Members of the group of project:
ADBS: Jean Meyriat
Bureau van Dijk: Eric Sutter
DGI: Marc Rittberger
SEDIC: Carlos Tejada
ULB: Marc Vandeur
Document established with the financial support of the European Commission – Program Leonardo da Vinci
© Consortium CERTIDoc, 2004
CERTIDoc – Evaluation Guide
2/7
SUMMARY
1 – OBJECT............................................................................................................................................................ 3
2 – REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................................. 3
3 – PURPOSE OF THE ASSESSMENT................................................................................................................ 3
4 – CANDIDATE’S SELF-ASSESSMENT........................................................................................................... 3
5 – ASSESSMENT OF THE ITEMS PROVIDED BY THE CANDIDATE ......................................................... 4
6 – THE INTERVIEW............................................................................................................................................ 5
7 – THE ASSESSMENT OF THE LEVEL OF QUALIFICATION ...................................................................... 7
1 – OBJECT
This document specifies the process for assessing a candidate to the European certification in information, such
as it is described within the § 8.5 and 8.6 of the General Rules established by the CERTIDoc Consortium. This
assessment consists of examining by a jury the competencies declared by the candidate with respect to the
minimal elements required for a given level of certification as they are defined into the Euroguide LIS of the
ECIA, 2004 edition. This present document is a methodological guide for approved certifier bodies and, in
particular, for members of the juries which have to examine the proofs submitted by the candidate. It should
contribute to ensure coherence in assessment and decisions between the various juries (from different countries
or from the same country but made up differently at different times).
2 – REFERENCES
-
CERTIDoc Consortium : General rules (2003)
CERTIDoc Consortium : Accreditation of assessors and constitution of juries (2004)
ECIA : Euroguide LIS (2004 edition), vol. 1 and 2
3 – PURPOSE OF THE ASSESSMENT
The multistep evaluation must determine if the candidate –for the level for which he/she is applying – has not
only the academic knowledge required for that level but also the practical professional experience (expertise,
skills, mastery of practical application of techniques and methods in the various areas of ability in the
Euroreference frame…) reflecting the standards of qualification expected from a professional at that level (see
the description of the four identified qualification levels in the Euroguide LIS, 2004 edition, vol. 2).
It is up to the candidate to prove that by providing "evidence". It is up to the assessors to judge whether that
evidence is admissible and relevant.
4 – CANDIDATE’S SELF-ASSESSMENT
An assessment of the applicant’s level of competence can be carried out by the applicant himself on a "field by
field" basis with the aid of Euroguide LIS (2004 edition), vol. 1: Competencies and aptitudes for European
Information professionals and other media made available by the certification body (self-assessment form,
electronic tools, etc.).
This self-assessment in each of the various areas of competence must be accompanied by :
-
Comments (including the description of the tasks actually carried out on a routine basis as part of his
professional activities, the applicant's contribution or responsibility as part of collective tasks, the level of
complexity of the problems frequently dealt with, etc.).
-
If possible, references to evidence or items of "proof" accompanying the "applicant's application".
The term "proof" is taken to refer to any document making it possible to demonstrate mastery of knowledge or of
know-how in a given area of competence. This may take the form of:
-
A confirmation from a third party professional who has been in a position on several occasions to
objectively assess the performance of a routine service carried out by the applicant, (concerning both the
CERTIDoc – Evaluation Guide
3/7
level of the method used and the level of the results obtained, and regarding accepted practices for the
profession), for the needs of users, etc.
-
The results from the activities usually carried out: an information product, a documentary tool, a
communication media, the results of a survey, a schedule of conditions, etc.
-
A professional publication: reporting to a conference concerning the work carried out in the area of
competence under consideration, published works, etc.
-
A training media reflecting an activity involving teaching, the transfer of knowledge, tutoring, etc.
-
Verifiable references concerning work carried out for external clients as part of consultancy or assistance
activities (regarding organization, documentary engineering, the evaluation of information sources, etc.).
-
The results of professional efficiency measurements carried out by a third party.
This ranking results in the allocation of a number corresponding to the level of competence that the applicant
considers that he has attained, based on the scale supplied by the Euroguide LIS (2004 edition), ranging from 0
(if he has no knowledge of the subject, something which incidentally can be a completely normal state of affairs)
up to 4.
Note 1: The same item of proof may concern several areas of competence, but the comments must be specific to
each area concerned.
Note 2: Results from non-routine or non-habitual work (work which is therefore exceptional with regard to its
scale or its complexity, work which is infrequent or "one-off") may be accepted as proof insofar as it is clearly
demonstrated that this concerns a personal achievement, that the accepted practices have been observed, that the
performance deadlines have been reasonable and that the recipient/beneficiary of the work was satisfied with the
result.
Note 3: It is not compulsory to indicate a level for the area of competence S01 of group S ("Additional fields").
If the applicant wishes to highlight know-how which he considers to be particularly useful in the performance of
his activity as a professional in the information-documentation field, he must position himself on the table and
clearly show the necessary comments:
- The title of the corresponding area of competence.
- A detailed description of the know-how used as part of the information-documentation activity, justifying
the chosen level (including details of tasks which could not be carried out without possessing this particular
knowledge or know-how).
5 – ASSESSMENT OF THE ITEMS PROVIDED BY THE CANDIDATE
The members of the jury undertake to respect the confidentiality of documents qualified as confidential by the
candidate.
They examine the items which make up the candidate’s dossier, including:
- Motivation, objectives pursued,
- Descriptive file of professional career (pre-structured CV),
- Copies of general and specialized diplomas held,
- Plan for continuous professional development (continuous education received, courses taken, proved selftaught learning), with the corresponding attestations,
- Description of the Company he/she works for or has recently worked for (status, size, branch of activity,
staff, equipment, documentary structure…),
- Duties performed, components of activity (missions, tasks, projects developed…) and on the organization of
work, conditions under which the activity is carried out; degree of independence, importance of the team,
responsibility,
- Personal achievements (publications, products…) and other evidence of know-how and mastery of the
techniques – useful for practicing the occupation or the function,
- Possible information on participation in associative or non-professional activities,
- File for self-assessment of abilities.
The members of the jury appreciate the marks proposed by the candidate for each field of competency and the
evidence he has provided. The jury may be brought, in sight of these proofs and of the presented commentaries,
to attribute a level of competency different from that declared by the candidate for each field of competency.
If it is equal or superior to the minimum requested for the postulated level, the candidate is summoned
to un interview.
CERTIDoc – Evaluation Guide
4/7
-
If it is inferior, notification is given to the candidate of the marks given by the jury and its
commentaries. The candidate may then choose, either to be evaluated for a lower level of certification
and be summoned for an interview on this new basis, or to wait six months before presenting any
supplementary information to the dossier providing proof of an improvement in skills. In this case this
new request for certification is once again examined by the jury.
The chairperson and the other members of the jury then prepare the interview, in particular by determining the
aspects on which questions will be put to the candidate.
POINTS TO BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION BY THE ASSESSORS
The candidate’s professionalism – at the level considered – will be checked very thoroughly either by examining
the items in the dossier or during the interview on the following points:
- effective and regular contribution to activities « at the heart of the profession » of informationdocumentation (dealing with the content and not only directing the flow of documents or using electronic tools),
- a good understanding of documentary operations, the mission of mediation between the sources and the
person making the request, the different purposes of document management and, above all of their content
(watch, memory, assistance for problem solving, contribution towards improving knowledge…), in general and
in the specific context of his/her current position (perception of specific stakes, priorities…),
- good listener of the users, of their needs, and their satisfaction : quality of content selection, of presentation
or methods of making material available ; follow-up of the development of needs, organization of feed-back.
- efficacy of the methods chosen; efficiency; mastery of the rules of the trade or their transposition; mastery
of technology and organization; adaptation to the most recent information and communication technologies.
- autonomy: responsibility; taking initiative; capacity to suggest improvements, positive contributions within
the team,
- adaptability to different work environments; vocabulary, broad professional culture; reading professional
publications; satisfactory integration into the profession (contact with other professionals, continuous
training…),
- breadth and progression of responsibilities, level of responsibilities currently exercised, complexity of
missions entrusted, knowledge called into service.
6 – THE INTERVIEW
POINTS TO BE PARTICULARLY CHECKED, ACCORDING TO THE POSTULATED LEVEL
Level 1: Assistant in Information Services
Points to check:
- knowledge of basic information services techniques and vocabulary,
- operational responsibility (routine work) for producing a documentary product (for example a bulletin), for a
service (providing information though a simple research in a file), for a tool (up-dating a list of journals,
source files…). Taking charge of an administration process, of a flow of documents.
Level 2 : Technician in Information Services
Points to check:
- Complicated searches for information in a data bank; use of controlled documentary languages;
- Documentary products produced with complete autonomy and adapted to the context of needs of the users;
- To be completely in charge of a small unit of work with content processing.
Level 3 : Manager in Information Services
Points to check:
- Actually having put into practice at least one recognized method of management (analysis of the value,
quality, management of a project…),
- Experience relating to resource management (information panel, budget, team animation, assessment of
technical means…),
- Testimony of personal achievements involving actual engineering work, conception of information product.
CERTIDoc – Evaluation Guide
5/7
Level 4 : Experts in Information Services
Points to check:
- Activity of transfer of knowledge in the field of his/her speciality,
- Testimony of personal achievements justifying he has a higher level of expertise than a manager,
- References on expert appraisal, study or advisory operations in several organizations.
The aim of the interview is to assess the professional competence of the applicant and his ability to fulfil the
roles and functions which may be allocated to a certified professional of his level.
As part of the assessment procedure, the specific goals of the applicant’s interview with the jury are:
-
To obtain any possible clarification concerning the actual contribution made by the applicant to the work or
the results presented in the application.
-
To assess the applicant's objectiveness or his "critical approach" vis-a-vis his professional activity.
-
To clarify and add to the information presented in the application (clearing up any aspects which are not
dealt with fully in the declaration or the accompanying items).
-
To highlight any possible incoherence between the comments and the proof supplied in the application, and
the explanations supplied verbally.
-
To confirm or invalidate the scores in those areas in which the jury may be hesitating.
The jury has complete freedom when carrying out the interview and its investigations. Nevertheless, the
following sequence of events is recommended:
-
At the beginning of the interview, the members of the jury introduce themselves to the applicant.
-
The applicant then has a maximum of 10 to 15 minutes to present the professional activities for which he
has responsibility, the methods that he uses, his interaction with users and the way in which he deals with
their needs or expectations.
-
Initial questions may concern the applicant's personal contribution to the activities and the creation of
documentary products and services, and concerning his interactions with the supervisory team and his
colleagues at work.
-
Further questions may focus on the applicant's views concerning the strengths and weaknesses of his
professional activity.
-
Questions may then focus on a particularly "weak" area vis-à-vis the level required: What is the cause for
this? What measures have been taken by the applicant to increase his competence?
Following the interview, the applicant is invited to leave the room. Information is provided to him concerning
the approximate date on which the certification committee will issue its decision.
The jury discusses the application and defines the final scores allocated for each area of competence and each
group of areas of competence, taking account of the documents in the application supplied by the applicant, the
additional information supplied during the verbal interview and the clarifications and explanations supplied
verbally by the applicant.
The fact that an applicant may have a level of competence in area S01 of group S may have an influence on the
jury's assessment, if this level of competence is clearly explained and supported both by the proof attached to the
application itself and also during the interview, and the score from this area may in a certain manner compensate
for an area from groups T, C or M in which the applicant is weak.
The assessment of the quality of the presentation of the application may influence the jury with regard to the
score allocated in the "Written Communication" field. Similarly, the quality of the applicant's behaviour during
the interview may influence the jury concerning the score allocated in the "Oral Communication" field.
In some cases (which must be rare and which must be duly justified and supported), the jury may issue an
unfavourable verdict despite scores exceeding the minimal threshold for the level considered, or, on the contrary,
issue a favourable verdict regarding certification for a given level despite scores below the minimal threshold for
the level in question.
>>> Following the jury’s discussions, the Chairman fills out an assessment form (including details of
assessment scores, what should happen next concerning the certification application, arguments or an overall
assessment in favour of accepting or rejecting the applicant for the level requested, or possibly proposing that he
CERTIDoc – Evaluation Guide
6/7
accepts a lower level, suggestions for additional training etc.). This form is dated and signed by the members of
the jury.
The application and the assessment form are then sent to the certification committee for a final decision to be
taken.
It is only at this stage that the applicant is officially informed of the decision taken by the certification
committee.
7 – THE ASSESSMENT OF THE LEVEL OF QUALIFICATION
As it has been indicated above, the assessment is made of two steps.
The first one is the self-assessment by the candidate, and the appreciation by the jury of the rightness or not of
the marks attributed to him/herself by the candidate.
The jury then decides to summon or not the candidate to an interview.
Second step: after interviewing the candidate, the jury has to fit the marks. He talks with the candidate with the
view to refine the evaluation of its professional qualities as well as its personal ones, indispensable to carry on
this trade, and his aptitudes to fulfil the functions which may be entrusted to a certificate holder. The jury follows
the methods and recommendations presented in chapter 6 above to determine the final marks and make a
decision on the award of the certificate.
7.1 Process for calculating the notation
The mechanism of assessment is readable through a notation: one mark by level of competence for each field
described into the Euroguide LIS (2004 edition). So five marks are possible in this system: 0, 1, 2, 3 or 4. The
calculation is made by the same way at all levels. The global mark is the result of a simple addition.
To obtain the possibility to have an interview with the jury, the candidates have to simultaneously obtain a mark
equal or superior to :
- a minimum mark for the group I (Information) of the Euroguide LIS,
- a minimum global mark for the whole T, C, M groups.
Given the diversity of professional features of the candidates, it is admitted that in one or several fields within
the same group, a candidate may obtain a mark inferior to that which is required at that level, under the condition
that the difference is compensated by a mark superior to that in one or several other fields within the same group.
IMPORTANT NOTICE (on the eliminatory zero): it is admitted at all levels that a candidate may lack in
knowledge or know-how in one field of competency in group I, but:
- to obtain twice a zero in two fields of group I is eliminatory;
- to obtain the mark zero in the field T01 is eliminatory.
7.2 Minimum mark simultaneously required
Level Assistant
- 1 in 11 fields at least of group I = 11 marks or more
- 1 in 10 fields at least of groups T, C and M = 10 marks or more
Level Technician
- 2 in 10 fields at least and 1 in one field of group I = 21 marks or more
- 2 in 10 fields at least of groups T, C and M = 20 marks or more
Level Manager
- 3 in 10 fields at least and 1 in one field of group I = 31 marks or more
- 3 in 10 fields at least of groups T, C and M = 30 marks or more
Level Expert
- 4 in 6 fields of group I
- and 3 in 4 fields of group I
- and 1 in 1 field of group I = 37 marks or more in group I
- 4 in 10 fields at least of groups T, C and M = 40 marks or more
CERTIDoc – Evaluation Guide
7/7