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

2. 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.

3. Academic Personnel Manual (APM)

5. 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!

6. 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

7. 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

8. 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

9. 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.

10. 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

11. 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?”

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

13. 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

14. 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”

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

16. 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

17. Professional Competence
Not Applicable
Needs Improvement
Favorable
Outstanding
Overall

18. 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

19. 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

20. 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.

21. 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

22. 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

23. 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

24. 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

25. 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

27. 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.

28. 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.”

29. 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.”

30. 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.”

31. 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.”

32. 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.”

33. 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.”

34. 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.”

35. 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.”

36. 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