Department of Medicine

Three Year Review

Workshop

Department of Medicine

Three Year Review

Workshop

January 20, 2011

Joan Wither & Frank L. SilverCo-Chairs, Three Year Review

Joan WitherCo-Chair, Three Year Review

Three Year ReviewThree Year Review

Workshop Agenda 8:00 Welcome

8:10 Overview of the Three-Year Review Process

Frank Silver

8:30 Academic Job Descriptions and Requirements

Joan Wither

8:45 WebCV Ben Smith Lea

9:15 Teaching Dossier Shiphra Ginsburg

9:30 Questions All

Three Year ReviewThree Year Review

Purpose

To formally evaluate the progress of the faculty early in their careers to:

• provide feedback on their progress • ensure faculty are on track for successful

promotion and advancement• ensure that faculty have the right job

description

Three Year ReviewThree Year ReviewProcess – When?

• 2.5 years after the initial appointment (December or January of the third academic year of the appointment) faculty receive a letter from the Chair of the Department of Medicine, to prepare a report of their academic activities since the beginning of their appointment to the Department.

• Deadline for report this year is March 18, 2011

• Extensions can be granted on individual basis by the Chair of the Department of Medicine (e.g. maternity/paternity leave, health problems)

Three Year ReviewThree Year ReviewProcess – What?

You need to submit your:

• Personal Cover Letter• CV* • teaching dossier (x2)

CVScholar’s statementTeaching and Education

Report*

• a copy of CV to DDD and PIC ASAP (for letters of support)

Deadline: March 18th

* generated by WebCV

Three Year ReviewThree Year Review

Three Year ReviewThree Year Review

http://www.deptmedicine.utoronto.ca/Faculty/Three-Year_Review.htm

Three Year ReviewThree Year Review

Cover Letter

• Synopsis of your academic career – where you have been, where you are going and any significant interruptions – high level overview of your academic accomplishments

related to teaching, research and creative professional activity since your appointment to the DOM

– emphasize your research / educational focus and any changes that have occurred or any that are planned

– a 5 year plan including future goals– include a summary of your clinical work load annually

Three Year ReviewThree Year Review

Creative Professional Activity

Three Year ReviewThree Year Review

Process – Who Does the Evaluation?

• 16 members with different job descriptions (CT, CE, CI, CS, RS) from different hospitals and a variety of subspecialties

• A primary and secondary reviewer are assigned to each faculty dossier to review and summarize the material for the whole committee

• The committee has a full discussion about each candidate and a consensus opinion is reached

Three Year ReviewThree Year ReviewCommittee Members

Frank Silver: CI – Neurology UHN

Joan Wither: CS – Rheumatology UHN

Dianne Broussard: RS – Neurology UHN Young-Ing Kim: CS – Gastroenterology SMH

Ivy Fettes : CE – Endocrinology SBH Sam Radharkrishnan: CT – Cardiology SBH

Shiphra Ginsburg - CE – GIM MSH Paula Rochon: RS – Geriatric Med WCH

Anil Chopra: CT – Emergency Med UHN Irv Salit: CI – Infectious Diseases UHN

Bill Geerts: CI – Respirology SBH Lilian Siu: CI – Oncology UHN

John Granton: CI – Critical Care UHN Liz Tullis: CI – Respirology SMH

Kamel Kamel: CI – Nephrology SMH Hillar Vellend: CE – Infectious Diseases MSH

Three Year ReviewThree Year Review

Process - Conclusion

The Co-Chairs of the committee draft a letter for the Chair Department of Medicine conveying the committee’s deliberations and conclusions

Meets/surpasses requirements + feedback

Does not meet requirements, extend probation + feedback (e.g. more protected time, more mentorship, change in job description)

Does not meet requirements, recommend that appointment not be renewed

Three Year ReviewThree Year Review

Process - Conclusion

• The Chair of Medicine reviews the Committee’s conclusions + the available documentation and makes a final decision about each candidate

• The Chair of Medicine shares this information with the PIC and DDD, who then convey the information to the candidate

Three Year ReviewThree Year Review

Three Year ReviewThree Year Review

Summary

• The Three Year Review is meant to help give you guidance and make sure that you are on the right track (not to give you a nervous breakdown)

• Please get your documents in by March 18, 2011(this could give you and Jim Hartley a nervous breakdown)

• Send your CV ASAP to your PIC and DDD so that they can provide a constructive feedback

Three Year ReviewThree Year ReviewNext step

• start working on the documents

for your promotion to Associate

Professor !

Three Year ReviewThree Year ReviewJob Descriptions

• Job description should be defined when started in the Department of Medicine

• Define the criteria by which your success will be judged

• Review at 3 years permits determination of whether your job description is appropriate for the work that you do

• Allows review of supports in place to permit remediation if necessary

• Full job descriptions are located at http://www.deptmedicine.utoronto.ca/Faculty/appointments/domjob.htm

Three Year ReviewThree Year ReviewClinician Scientist – Description

and Expectations

• Major activity is research

• 70-80% research, 10-15% teaching, 10-15% clinical, 5-10% administration

• Expected productivity

• principal investigator on an established research program

• Holds as PI at least one peer-reviewed grant

• ≥ 2 peer-reviewed manuscripts per year as 1st or senior author

Three Year ReviewThree Year ReviewScientist – Description and

Expectations

• Non-MD whose major activity is research

• 80-90% research, 10-15% teaching, 5-10% administration

• Expected productivity

• principal investigator on an established research program

• Holds as PI at least one peer-reviewed grant

• ≥ 2-3 peer-reviewed manuscripts per year as 1st or senior author

Three Year ReviewThree Year ReviewClinician Scientist/Scientist –

Application Tips• Judged predominantly on your research success, however evidence of effective teaching and administration will also be sought

• Cover letter• should highlight your achievements and future goals in

research – a focused research program is an asset

• Opportunity to outline any impediments to success – such as protected time, research environment, mentorship, financial support

• Funding • Very important that your role in grants defined

• Publications• Outline clearly how you contributed to the publication

(especially important if publishing with previous supervisor)

Three Year ReviewThree Year ReviewClinician Investigator –

Description and Expectations

• Direct clinical research program but time commitment to research less than 70%

• 30-40% clinical, 25-30% teaching, 30-40% research/administration

• Expected productivity

• principal investigator in clinical research

• Holds one peer-reviewed grant or major industry grant

• ≥ 1 peer-reviewed manuscript per year as 1st or senior author

Three Year ReviewThree Year ReviewClinician Investigator –

Application Tips• Judged on the strength of your clinical program and your research success

• Cover letter• should highlight your achievements and future goals in

research – a focused clinical/research program is an asset

• Opportunity any impediments to success

• Funding • Very important that your role in grants defined – especially

important for industry funded grants and research contracts

• Some evidence of intellectual contribution to grant process is required

• Publications• Outline clearly how you contributed to the publication

Three Year ReviewThree Year ReviewClinician Educator – Description

and Expectations

• Major time commitment to teaching, educational administration, and related scholarly activities

• 30-40% clinical, 30-40% teaching, 25-30% research/administration

• Expected benchmarks

• Excellence in teaching

• Participant in educational research or other scholarly activities

• Senior administrative responsibilities

• Chair of major departmental/hospital committee

Three Year ReviewThree Year ReviewClinician Educator – Application

tips• Evaluated on excellence in teaching and evidence of participation in education-based research or other scholarly education-based activities required

• Cover letter• should highlight your achievements in education

and future goals in education-based scholarly activity

• Impact of your scholarly activity on education should be outlined

• Inclusion of ITERS, other teaching evaluations and teaching awards important

Three Year ReviewThree Year ReviewClinician Teacher – Description and

Expectations

• Individuals with major clinical responsibilities who participate in teaching activities

• 50-70% clinical, 15-25% teaching, 15-25% research/administration

• Expected benchmarks

• Excellence in teaching

• Important clinical contribution to Department of Medicine

Three Year ReviewThree Year ReviewClinician Teacher – Application tips

• Evaluated on excellence in teaching and clinical contribution to departments

• Cover letter• should highlight your clinical program and teaching

commitments

• Inclusion of ITERS, other teaching evaluations and teaching awards important

Three Year ReviewThree Year ReviewClinician Administrator –

Description and Expectations

• Individuals with major administrative responsibilities that occupy at least half of their time

• 50% or more administration, balance of teaching, research, clinical

• Expected benchmarks

• Senior administrative responsibilities at the Departmental or Faculty levels