Documenting your achievements for advancement Renee Binder, MD Elena Fuentes-Afflick, MD, MPH Paul Garcia, MD Bonnie Johnson, MSW SOM Academic Affairs

1. Identify the criteria used to assess academic advancement. 2 1. Identify the criteria used to assess academic advancement. 2. Review the criteria for accelerations. 3. Using case examples, evaluate academic advancement packets to identify characteristics for success.

Academic Personnel Manual (APM)

UCSF Faculty Appointments Series - 5 Rank - Assistant, Associate, Professor Step Assistant I to VI Associate I to V Professor I to IX and Above Scale 21 total levels!

ADJUNCT SERIES Teaching Research OR Research Teaching These faculty are permitted to have a significant imbalance in their distribution of activities across the 4 evaluation criteria. Usually, a faculty member in the Adjunct series either emphasizes: Research – in which the criteria for productivity, independence and significance are similar to those of the Ladder/In-Res series’ or Teaching – in which the criteria for “distinction in teaching” are similar to those in Ladder/ In-Res and Clinical / Clin X series’. Adjunct faculty engage in University/public service to the extent that it is consistent with their assignment. Teaching Research

HEALTH SCIENCES CLINICAL SERIES Scholarly/Creative activity See Departmental Guidelines Similar to Clinical X faculty – except even more imbalance because University guidelines state that creativity activity is “encouraged” – but the extent of the requirement is delegated to Departments to define at UCSF. Faculty in the HS Clin Prof series are primarily clinician-educators Outstanding: - Clinical competence - Teaching - Service

CLINICAL X SERIES Outstanding: - Clinical competence - Teaching Scholarly / Creative activity Criteria for evaluation are very similar to Ladder Rank – EXCEPT in the area of research / creative activity, where the requirements are not as stringent for productivity or independence. The majority of the % effort of faculty in this series is dedicated to clinical service and teaching. Outstanding: - Clinical competence - Teaching - Service Dissemination of scholarly work

LADDER RANK and IN RESIDENCE SERIES Contribute with distinction: - Professional competence (clinical, if applicable) - Research - Teaching - Service (University, professional, public) Contribute with distinction in all aspects of University evaluation. Over next few slides – we’ll look at how your Dept Chair, your Dean and the campus will evaluate success in each of these areas.

Rules and Privileges Ladder Rank In Residence Clinical X Adjunct HS Clinical Tenure/length of Appointment Yes Varies* Yearly % time 100 Any Sabbatical/ Professional leave Yes** 8 year rule No*** Appraisal On request Academic Senate member No * appointed without end date at Associate/Professor level, no tenure ** professional leave possible *** no 8 year rule at UCSF, but applies to other campuses

Academic Advancement 4 Criteria: - Teaching and mentoring - Research and/or creative activities - Professional competence - University & public service Weighting of Criteria: - Varies by series - Department-defined Sally told you the areas of academic review. Impt to understand that criteria are: Success in each category can actually “look different” depending upon the series. For example, Dr. Marshall is a ladder rank faculty member and success in research for her meant something very different than success in research & creative activity for me (a Clin X). Series-dependent – must understand how impt each of the criteria are to your particular series Department-defined – Chancellor and Deans have general framework for evaluating academic success – but the place that the academic “rubber meets the road” is within your department. For this reason, it is critical to understand how your departmental peers and Department Chair define success in each of the criteria. Will be instructive to look in more detail at each of these criteria to understand how your Dept Chair, Dean will evaluate your productivity – we’ll do this in the context of the different academic series. Departmental criteria may be exceed those used by the Campus, but they can never be less rigorous. If they are MORE rigorous, you better know about it. Ask – “Is there a department-specific document for advancement in my series?”

Teaching and Mentoring Not Applicable Needs Improvement Favorable Outstanding Overall Student/trainee/mentee evaluations Peer Evaluations Teaching and Mentoring

Evaluation of Teaching Direct teaching: Students, graduate students, residents, fellows Course / Program Administration Program design, curricular innovations Textbooks, other teaching materials Educational scholarship Advising and mentoring: Trainees, faculty Data sources CV Teaching evaluations Reference letters

Challenges Teaching is hard to define Teaching contributions are hard to document Teaching effort varies E-value assessments may be limited What is the ‘gold standard?’ “All UCSF faculty are excellent teachers”

Changes to the CV which impact teachers and educators Elimination of teaching hours Teaching awards have been moved to the Awards section

Scholarly / Creative Activities Research and/or Creative Activities Not Applicable Needs Improvement Favorable Outstanding Overall Productivity Independence Significance of research Collaborative research (not a requirement) Peer-reviewed research support

Professional Competence Not Applicable Needs Improvement Favorable Outstanding Overall

University and Public Service Administration Departmental Committees Interdepartmental Activities Search Committees University Service UCSF Campus-wide, School-wide activities Academic Senate Committees UC System-wide Activities Professional Service Editorial Board Professional Society Leadership Community, Public Service

Faculty Review Process #1 – Departmental review #2 – Chair’s assessment #3 – Academic Affairs office #4 – Vice Provost for Academic Affairs #5 – CAP (Committee on Academic Personnel) #6 – Vice Provost for Academic Affairs

Objectives 1. Identify the criteria used to assess academic advancement. 2. Review the criteria for accelerations. 3. Using case examples, evaluate academic advancement packets to identify characteristics for success.

On-time advancement Assistant: merit increase every 2 years Promoted after 6-7 years as Assistant or 2 years at Step IV Associate: merit increase every 2 years Promoted after 6 years or 2 years at Step III Professor: merit increase every 3 years

Accelerations All faculty are expected to be outstanding! UCSF Criteria for Advancement (2014) Anyone may nominate a faculty member for accelerated advancement, including self-nomination

Guidelines for 1-year acceleration Outstanding performance in all areas and exceptional performance in ≥ 1 category: teaching, research, professional competence, University/public service Consecutive accelerations are unusual and require CAP review

Examples of exceptional performance Receipt of a competitive professional service award Sustained level of outstanding achievement Unusual productivity in publishing original work Sustained (3 years), dedicated service on a major committee: CAP, CHR, Admissions

Guidelines for multi-year acceleration More difficult Requires exceptional performance in multiple areas Example: Receipt of multiple competitive grants – greater than the expected level for the Academic series Example: Receipt of multiple professional service awards - greater than the expected level for the Academic series CAP review and approval required

Objectives 1. Identify the criteria used to assess academic advancement. 2. Review the criteria for accelerations. 3. Using case examples, evaluate academic advancement packets to identify characteristics for success.

Teaching Narrative “I am participating in the Teaching Scholars Program to deepen my skills as an educator and an education researcher. I have an interest in developing curriculum, especially blended ones that combine online learning with in-person instruction.”

Teaching Narrative “My teaching activities largely consist of bedside teaching and supervision of house staff in the [department]. During shifts in the [unit], I also conduct a brief teaching session or case conference. I have taught in the intersession classes for residents, ACLS classes for fourth year students and incoming interns, and in the Introduction to [Specialty] course.”

Teaching Narrative “My formal teaching during the past academic years has been in the context of the medical student core curriculum course [name].  In this course, I lead 20 medical students in a small group sessions.”

Clinical Narrative “My clinical work focuses on outpatient care for a primarily Spanish-speaking, publically insured population at the ZSFG. I supervise residents, medical students and nurse practitioner students in the clinic approximately 10 hours per week.”

Service Activities “Much of my service to the Medical School was initially through work in the clinical arena, serving on numerous committees to improve patient care and patient satisfaction. After I obtained a change of series to Clinical X, I served on the [Committee] for two years, then was appointed Vice Chair and then Chair of that committee.”

Service “Service to my specialty, nationally, is performed primarily in two areas: service to publications and to my specialty society. I am a member of the Editorial Board of the Annals of [Specialty], having previously served as a consulting editor and reviewer. I continue to review as well.”

University and Public Service “Dr. X has served twice on the Committee on Human research and once on the Cancer Center Protocol Review Committee, both committees with heavy work-loads and generous time commitments. Since 1993, Dr. X has served on the [division] fellowship steering committee and fellowship selection committee.”

Mentoring Narrative “In my role as Mentoring Liaison for the School of Medicine to my department, I meet yearly with each faculty member in the department to review their career goals and progress with regard to teaching, research and scholarly activity, and service, as well as explain differences between series and criteria for promotion.”

Know your series and the requirements for advancement and promotion Update your CV in Advance Develop a national/international reputation Volunteer for leadership positions at UCSF and professional organizations Review for journals, professional meetings Cultivate internal and external references Meet regularly with your Chair Request accelerations when appropriate