Originally I hadCandidates

  • 9
  • 42
  • 67
  • 80
  • 84
  • 85 All ended up scoring the highest for me
  • Then I realize that 67 and 85 were the same candidate
  • SO I was going through my runners up this morning
    • And end up finding better candidates 5 and 8
    • I realize I definately was grading harder in the beginning

I thought all candidates were solid because:

  • metadata experience in digital collections
  • explicitly talked about metadata standards (not MODS, METs PRIMIS)

Going through my notes here

I liked Candidate 84

  • Their cover letter to me felt the most authentic
  • I was impressed with both the variety of the places they worked, in depth with their accomplishments
    • dropping names of different organization and grants
    • demonstrated a lot of proven experience
  • I dont know software in this field, but googling Oxygen XML and OpenRefine, I’m guessing these are complex data management tools

    Candidate 80

  • Cover letter was also super solid
    • had very hands on experience
  • explicitly named both MOD and PREMIS
    • in a context that convinced me he know what he was talking about
  • Helps that they have direct experience at the university and if hopefully familiar with our environment
  • Very good supervising

42

Definately have a nonconventional career, (Minnesota Lottery, and Braille Library), so I’m wondering how applicable his skills will be at the univeristy

  • But I like that they were very explicit with their technical skills
    • linux command lines
    • python, SQL, powershelld, C progrmaing

67

  • Good hands on experience with a lot of standards

  • breifly mentioned the phrase “command-line” in their objective statement, but nothing in their material demonstrated anything specific examles

9

I ranked really high, because I thought they had a very solidly written cover letter, but my only concern is that a lot of their experience are not very recent.

  • Their two main examples in their cover letter is from 2022 and 2017 in their resume

Runner ups

  • 5: has supervising and leadership experience in archivist, but I nedd up knocking off points because I didnt notice they name drop any standards
  • 8: Over 10 years of leading some pretty cool digital preservation projects. They hit all of the bullet points
    • command-line tools
    • python scripting
    • they mentioned automation
    • really good supervising

My assessment is that all their cover letterss

committee