I found the criteria listed below on the CILIP site and decided to repeat them here for reference. I am glad that there are assessment criteria, even if they are a bit vague. That means that it will be harder initially to decide what to include in my PPDP and my portfolio but it also means that chartership can be easily adapted to individual circumstances and skills levels.
- Does the application satisfactorily demonstrate the ability to reflect critically on personal performance? (The candidate should show that s/he has thought about their performance and ways in which it has been improved as a result of experience of ‘doing the job’ or undertaking a particular task or role.)
- Does the application satisfactorily demonstrate the ability to evaluate service performance? (The candidate should show that s/he is able evaluate the effectiveness of the library/information unit/s for which they work, or have worked, in meeting its/their aims and objectives.)
- Does the application satisfactorily demonstrate active commitment to continuing professional development? (The candidate should show how they have carried out their PPDP. There should be evidence of involvement in both formal and informal developmental activities e.g. employer’s training programme/s, courses, visits, reading, email discussion lists, participation in CILIP branches and groups.)
- Does the application satisfactorily demonstrate the ability to analyse personal and professional development as a result of formal and informal training and development activities? (The candidate should show how their skills and knowledge have changed and their practice has been enhanced as a result of learning from formal and informal training and development activities.)
- Does the application satisfactorily demonstrate breadth of professional knowledge and understanding of the wider professional context? (The candidate should show that s/he he can think beyond the confines of their own job and is aware of issues which influence the wider profession)
Other things they assessment panel will look at:
- Does the candidate satisfactorily demonstrate professional judgement through the selection of evidence and the presentation of the application as a whole?
- Comments on Evaluative Statement ( for example, how well does this link to the assessment criteria; is it cross-referenced to the portfolio evidence; are choices of portfolio evidence explained and linked to the assessment criteria?)
- Personal Professional Development Plan (does this analyse the impact and effectiveness of the training undertaken and, where appropriate? Show how the Plan has been amended to include changed/new training needs. NB. Candidates who registered under previous Regulations may have followed a Route A or B plan rather than the PPDP)
- Participation in Mentor Scheme (does the candidate give evidence of active participation e.g. through records of professional discussion. NB. Candidates who registered under previous Regulations may not have participated in the Mentor Scheme)
- Comments on Evidence ( e.g. is there an effective contents table; has evidence been well chosen to link to the assessment criteria; is it effectively organised; is authorship of and contribution to individual items of evidence clear? i.e the candidate must clearly attribute contributions from other authors where necessary)
Also, I have now read some more about chartership and how people went about writing their PPDPs and these blog posts stood out to me: