The Candidate’s Role in the A&P Process for the Professoriate Linda M. Boxer, Vice Dean Cheryl Gore-Felton, OAA Associate Dean Jim Brooks, OAA Associate Dean Janice Lowe, OAA Associate Dean

Outline of Topics Feedback at the department level prior to reappointment or promotion Annual counseling meetings Overview of the reappointment or promotion process Timing Information that you provide Counseling memo with the A&P action

Supporting Early Career Faculty Providing support, guidance, advice and feedback to early career faculty is a high priority The University expects that counseling and mentoring will occur on a regular basis General guidelines outlining the kinds of support, advice, and feedback are provided

Counseling Counseling is the first aspect of guiding early career faculty It entails providing feedback on performance relative to the standards for reappointment and promotion A counseling session should be performed at least annually to review the performance of the early career faculty member in light of the criteria for reappointment or promotion

Counseling Meeting: Role of the Chair The chair (or chief or designee) is familiar with your background at Stanford He/she can describe the reappointment or promotion process and review the criteria He/she will complete and sign an annual counseling document explaining what was discussed You will sign the form and receive a copy of it

Role of Early Career Faculty Member in Counseling Meeting You should prepare for the counseling meeting: Review the expectations for the line Review the timing of the reappointment or promotion review Bring up-to-date CV and breakdown of effort Bring a list of activities in the planning stage Have specific questions regarding progress toward reappointment or promotion

Topics to Be Discussed in the Counseling Meeting Criteria and timeline for reappointment or promotion Scholarship, teaching and clinical activities Proportionality of effort in these activities Allocation of time (including any planned leaves) Academic/professional support (mentors, etc.) Financial issues Professional development and achievement of career goals Personal issues (if applicable)

Counseling Guidance During the annual counseling session, discussion of promotion should emphasize the comparative and predictive aspects of the promotion decision One cannot be counseled that he/she is “on track” for promotion because promotion judgments generally cannot be made until the referee letters are received as part of the evaluation process

Information Sessions The University (Provost and Vice Provost for Faculty Development and Diversity) and OAA provide information sessions for early career faculty Topics include criteria for the different faculty lines at each rank and information on promotion actions Guidance is also provided on other topics such as teaching strategies and student advising, management of research budgets and personnel, policies for new parents, etc.

Early Career Faculty Member’s Responsibility The goal of counseling and mentoring is to provide a supportive environment to assist the early career faculty member in succeeding in his/her academic career It should be recognized and communicated that the ultimate responsibility for career trajectory and success lies with each faculty member himself or herself

Early Career Faculty Member’s Responsibility cont’d It is up to the early career faculty members: To respond to invitations to meet with their mentors, chairs/chiefs To request counseling and mentoring sessions if such sessions are not scheduled for them To be familiar with the policies and procedures concerning reappointment and promotion (in the University Faculty Handbook and in the SoM Faculty Handbook)

Accomplishment Versus Promise Candidates for reappointment or promotion have the responsibility for designing and pursuing a schedule of research that results in publication in advance of the review Generally, by the time materials have been submitted, the candidate’s dossier should predominantly reflect a record of actual accomplishment (which confirms status in the field) rather than work that has been submitted or accepted but not yet published

Accomplishment Versus Promise 2 It is not possible for reviewers to judge the impact on the field of manuscripts that have recently been accepted or just published (speaks more to promise) Similarly, the faculty member’s career should be managed so that teaching and clinical care records are robust and ready to be evaluated by the time that the reappointment or promotion package is submitted

The A&P Process Reappointments and promotions are launched about one year before the end of the current term They can be done earlier in the term if justified From the annual counseling meetings, the timing of the reappointment or promotion review should be clear to you You provide material for the review, and input from many others is also solicited

The A&P Process: Long Form Material collected for the long form: Your updated CV Your candidate’s statement Letters from external referees who are leaders in the field and at peer institutions; must be at proposed rank or higher; internal referee letters also collected Certain actions require 5 peer comparators Letters from current and former trainees Teaching evaluations including courses and MedHub Clinical Excellence Surveys (if clinically active)

The A&P Process: Steps The entire process is confidential; you may be informed about the timeline The collected information is compiled into the long form and reviewed by an evaluation committee in the division or department Then the department A&P committee reviews and votes or in smaller departments, the entire faculty at the proposed rank and higher will vote

The A&P Process: Steps--2 The chair makes the final decision on the file for the department The long form is reviewed and voted on by the appropriate School A&P committee The Vice Dean and Dean review the file, and the Dean makes the final decision for the school All reappointments for a term are complete at the school level

The A&P Process: Steps--3 New appointments, promotions, continuing term, and tenure files go to the Provost MCL files are reviewed by the Provost and complete at that level Continuing term MCL files are reviewed by two members or former members of the Ad Board UTL and NTL files go to the Ad Board for review and vote The President makes the final decision

Review Committees and Decision Makers Department chair: initiates the action Departmental evaluation committee: conducts the formal evaluation and prepares the long form Options of the department chair: makes the final decision on forwarding file to the next level of review Vice Dean: approves submission of the long form to the School review committee

Review Committees and Decision Makers--2 Assistant Professor Review Committee (APRC): A&P committee advisory to the Vice Dean; reviews initial appointment or reappointment at the rank of assistant professor (APRC members are associate or full professors) A&P committee: advisory to the Vice Dean; reviews initial appointment, reappointment or promotion to the rank of associate professor or full professor (members are full professors)

Review Committees and Decision Makers--3 Vice Dean: makes a positive or negative recommendation to the Dean or may send the file back to the department with instructions Dean: makes the final decision on term appointments; for all other actions, the Dean determines whether to forward the file with a positive recommendation to the Provost

Review Committees and Decision Makers--4 Provost: makes the final decision on actions in the MCL; if favorably reviewed by the Provost, UTL and NTL actions are considered by the Advisory Board Advisory Board: a standing committee of the academic council whose seven members are elected from different schools; reviews and votes on long forms for UTL and NTL actions President: makes the final decision and can choose to accept or not accept the recommendation by the Ad Board

Vice Dean

Promotions and Reappointments 1 2 7 8 Promotions (and reappointments to tenure/continuing term) Long form assembly in department School review University review Final long form to OAA Final long form to University In Months 9 5 4 3 6 FAST|FAC launch 1 2 Reappointments (to term) Long form assembly in department School review Final long form to OAA In Months 5 4 3 6 FAST|FAC launch

Information Provided by the Candidate Up-to-date CV Candidate’s statement Suggest up to 3 referees; do not contact them List of current and former trainees; for assistant professor reappointment and promotion all current and former research trainees are solicited Suggestions for Clinical Excellence Survey evaluators Very important to provide information in a timely manner

CV Guidelines Keep CV up to date by collecting and recording relevant achievements as they occur Publications—articles, reviews, book chapters, abstracts Grants and awards Teaching awards Regional and national service—leadership in national organizations, journal review and editorial boards, study sections Invited presentations

CV Format There is no required format, but there are some requirements: List original research peer-reviewed articles All other publications in peer-reviewed journals Non-peer-reviewed articles Book chapters Books Abstracts

CV Format cont’d--2 Stanford faculty terms listed with all start and end dates in mm/dd/yy format Remove all dollar amounts from grants Note granting agency, title of grant, PI, your role if not PI, and dates of funding

CV Format cont’d--3 In collaborative work, it can be difficult for the reviewers to determine the nature of individual substantive contributions Annotation of middle author publications provides that information Category 1: conception and design; acquisition of data; analysis and interpretation of data Category 2: drafting of manuscript; critical revisions Category 3: statistical analysis; funding; supervision; administrative, technical or material support; other

Suggested CV Format I. Personal information II. Educational background III. Professional appointments IV. Honors and awards V. Scholarly publications VI. Editorial service—editorial boards, peer review activities VII. Grants—current, pending, prior

Suggested CV Format cont’d VII. Service as grant reviewer IX. Patents X. University administrative service XI. Service to professional organizations—membership, committee service, leadership XII. Presentations—national and regional meetings, international meetings (indicate invited talks), visiting professorships XIII. Community service

Candidate’s Statement This three page statement is your opportunity to have a voice in the reappointment or promotion process You are able to explain your contributions, achievements and future plans in each of the mission areas in which you contribute Most of the information should center on achievements during the current term and on future plans and goals

Candidate’s Statement: Scholarship Describe your investigative program—goals and accomplishments: Major contributions and achievements Major publications and scientific discoveries and how they have impacted knowledge and further research in the field and/or patient care Major grants and awards Future goals—ongoing research projects, publications planned for submission, grant applications planned or in review

Candidate’s Statement: Teaching and Mentorship Clinical bedside teaching and supervising, and student types (med students, residents, etc.) Lectures in the classroom, clinical setting, CME Career mentoring and advising and student types Research mentoring and direct supervision and student types Prestigious positions obtained by former trainees Program development and course development Awards received

Candidate’s Statement: Clinical Care General area of expertise, and description of clinical duties Interaction with other services, and any outreach to other locations Periods of exceptionally demanding clinical workload during the current appointment term Development and/or implementation of new clinical protocols and the impact of such protocols Awards received

Candidate’s Statement: Recognition in the Field Study sections Grant review Editorial boards or peer review for journals Administrative service to academic organizations Major invited presentations and visiting professorships Conferences organized Honors and awards from professional societies

Candidate’s Statement: Administrative Duties Description of administrative roles and responsibilities, and their impact (local, regional or national) Time commitment for administrative work; should be minimal for assistant professors Future goals and plans

Clinical Excellence Survey CES survey is sent to internal referees, other physicians, trainees, and other health care providers, nurse managers, and clinical administrators They are asked to rate a number of clinical and professional skills relative to Stanford’s expectation of excellence on a 1 to 5 scale (with 1=significant concern and 5=extraordinary)

Clinical Excellence Survey-2 The chair or designee selects the professional colleagues to be surveyed There should be a broad mix to allow informed commentary on the candidate’s clinical performance The CES forms and the identity of their authors are strictly confidential

Clinical Excellence Survey-3 Categories assessed include: General clinical proficiency Communication Professionalism Systems-based practice Overall clinical performance

Counseling Memo with A&P Action The counseling memo at the time of reappointment or promotion provides an opportunity to give candid feedback on the academic performance and progress to date based on the results of the reappointment or promotion review The feedback should be constructive, realistic, and specifically tailored to you and to the standards and criteria you will face in a future review or promotion

Counseling Memo with A&P Action cont’d The counseling memo is submitted with the recommendation papers (long form) in draft form After completion of the review process, the counseling memo is finalized and then discussed with you

Questions? Questions on the candidate’s role in the A&P process?

Medical Center Line Core Criteria Appointments (and subsequent reappointments and promotions) are based upon a requirement of excellence in the overall mix of contributions in clinical care, teaching, and scholarship that advances clinical medicine  Faculty must have a minimum of 20% protected time for scholarship

University Tenure Line Core Criteria The first criterion for a UTL appointment is that the candidate must have achieved (or, in the case of Assistant Professors, have the promise to achieve) true distinction in scholarship in a broadly defined field The second criterion for a UTL appointment is promise – or a record demonstrating – that the candidate is capable of sustaining a first-rate teaching program during his or her career at Stanford

Non-Tenure Line (Research) Core Criteria A candidate must have achieved (or, in the case of Assistant Professors, have the promise to achieve) true distinction in scholarship  Unlike faculty in the University Tenure Line whose research is conducted in a broadly defined field, faculty appointed in the Research Line generally have special expertise in a relatively narrow field that is of particular benefit to a broader clinical or research program

Non-Tenure Line (Teaching) Core Criteria The overriding requirement for faculty appointment, reappointment and promotion in the Teaching Line is excellence in teaching, broadly defined Under most circumstances, it is expected that Teaching Line faculty will extend their successes at Stanford to broader regional or national audiences