Yale CV 2: Narrative Descriptions and Supporting Data

Transcript

• 00:04Okay. Why don't we get
• 00:05started? Welcome, everyone. Glad you
• 00:07could join us today.
• 00:09And the purpose of today's
• 00:10OAPD,
• 00:11presentation
• 00:12is to walk through the
• 00:14CV part two,
• 00:16which is the companion document
• 00:18to the Yale format CV,
• 00:21that doctor Grauer went over
• 00:22in, one of our meetings
• 00:24last month.
• 00:25Together, these two documents get
• 00:27the most attention,
• 00:29by external and internal reviewers,
• 00:31when people are reviewed for
• 00:33promotion.
• 00:35Your excuse me. Your your
• 00:36external reviewers
• 00:38that we talked a little
• 00:39bit about,
• 00:40a couple weeks ago will
• 00:42not get your teaching evaluations
• 00:44and very few of your
• 00:45reviewers
• 00:46will do more than glance
• 00:48at the PDF papers that
• 00:50you may be submitting with
• 00:51your dossier.
• 00:53But everyone
• 00:54who reviews you for promotion
• 00:56will will really look carefully
• 00:57at your CV and CV
• 00:59part two very closely, which
• 01:00is why we
• 01:03devote so much time to
• 01:04it.
• 01:05And really for those, if
• 01:07you were here a couple
• 01:07of weeks ago and we
• 01:08talked about letters of evaluation,
• 01:10I talked about arm's length
• 01:11evaluators.
• 01:13For arm's length evaluators who've
• 01:14never met you or may
• 01:15not know you, these two
• 01:17documents may be the main
• 01:18way that they construct their
• 01:20letter.
• 01:21Let me
• 01:24try to advance my slides.
• 01:29There we go.
• 01:31As you probably know, this
• 01:32is just a list of
• 01:33some of the documents that
• 01:34we've been, going over the
• 01:35past in the past month,
• 01:37and then we'll also talk
• 01:38about teaching evaluations in one
• 01:40of our upcoming
• 01:41presentations.
• 01:43Just to, kind of recap,
• 01:45the Yale CV,
• 01:47the Yale format CV that,
• 01:49Doctor. Grauer reviewed a couple
• 01:50sessions ago has a very
• 01:52specific and rigid format to
• 01:54it. And it limits you
• 01:57to a specific set sections
• 01:59where you'll list your positions
• 02:01and activities and achievements at
• 02:03Yale.
• 02:04But without really going into
• 02:06the kind of explanation or
• 02:07the level of detail,
• 02:09that you might typically include
• 02:11in your regular,
• 02:13professional CV if you maintain
• 02:15one of those separately from
• 02:16the Yale CV.
• 02:17So the CV part two,
• 02:19particularly the narrative sections, which
• 02:21I'll go over in a
• 02:22bit, allows you to move
• 02:24beyond listing things
• 02:26and gives you an opportunity
• 02:28to describe them in a
• 02:29in a way that,
• 02:30can tell your academic story
• 02:32more fully.
• 02:34It allows you to describe
• 02:35in more detail those clinical
• 02:37educational
• 02:38and in many cases, research
• 02:40activities,
• 02:41positions and accomplishments,
• 02:43and the extent to which,
• 02:45your reputation for excellence has
• 02:47been recognized,
• 02:49both within Yale, but as
• 02:51as importantly,
• 02:53beyond Yale.
• 02:55For those of you who
• 02:56may have participated in the,
• 02:58FDAC process within your department,
• 03:01the sections that you're going
• 03:02to be asked to complete,
• 03:05as part of the FDAC,
• 03:06really parallel many of the
• 03:08sections that we have on
• 03:09CV two and that was
• 03:11intentional.
• 03:12So completing one, whether it's
• 03:14the CV two or completing
• 03:15the
• 03:16FDAC sections,
• 03:18will help you completing the
• 03:19other document.
• 03:21And and both of these
• 03:22documents
• 03:23are important for,
• 03:25your mentors to be reviewing,
• 03:28with you as you're as
• 03:29you're having discussions about
• 03:31when you might be going
• 03:32up for promotion.
• 03:35So a few years ago,
• 03:36our office completed a fairly
• 03:38substantial revision to the CV,
• 03:40two.
• 03:41Probably most people around the
• 03:43call today,
• 03:44did not do not have
• 03:45a prior version of that.
• 03:47But if you do, I
• 03:47may make a couple of
• 03:48references to that,
• 03:50because we would expect that
• 03:51you would convert it to
• 03:52the the version we've had
• 03:54in place for, I think,
• 03:55about three years now.
• 03:57A major goal of that
• 03:58revision was to reduce the
• 04:00length,
• 04:01of the CV two. We're
• 04:02encountering cases where people had
• 04:04extremely long CV part twos,
• 04:06which were really placing quite
• 04:08a bit of burden on
• 04:09the various people who are
• 04:10having to review it. So
• 04:12we really, did a number
• 04:14of things, to essentially be
• 04:16removing duplicative
• 04:17text that was being put
• 04:19in,
• 04:20separate subsections,
• 04:22or eliminating
• 04:23some subsections that are that
• 04:25aren't relevant and encouraging faculty
• 04:27to focus on
• 04:29those sections or those highlights
• 04:30that are really most important
• 04:32for your individual career
• 04:34rather than getting lost in
• 04:36the minutia
• 04:37or are spending a lot
• 04:39of time, you know, reporting
• 04:40on things that you don't
• 04:41engage in in any significant
• 04:43way.
• 04:45The most significant change that
• 04:47we made was
• 04:48to separate the materials into
• 04:50two sections.
• 04:51There's a section A that
• 04:53include that will include only
• 04:55narrative descriptions of professional activities.
• 04:58And then a section B
• 04:59that includes the data that
• 05:01supports
• 05:02or describes in greater deep
• 05:04detail,
• 05:05those,
• 05:06those sections.
• 05:07I'll go through each of
• 05:08those in a little bit.
• 05:10Related,
• 05:11major change we made were
• 05:12word limits for the entirety
• 05:14of each narrative section.
• 05:16Some people will ask, well,
• 05:17what if what if I
• 05:18go over the word limit
• 05:19by a little bit? I
• 05:20think most departments in the
• 05:22school committees are forgiving if
• 05:23you're if you're going over
• 05:25by a little bit. But
• 05:26if you've got a section
• 05:27that's twice as long as
• 05:28it should be,
• 05:29it should be getting,
• 05:31returned to you to, to
• 05:32reduce it, to a more
• 05:34succinct presentation.
• 05:36And that's really for your
• 05:37own benefit. So the reviewers
• 05:38can really, again,
• 05:41appreciate the highlights of your
• 05:43successful career as opposed to,
• 05:45the minutiae of it.
• 05:47And the other change that
• 05:48we made was, we wanted
• 05:50there to be a better
• 05:51opportunity,
• 05:52overall in, in each section
• 05:54to highlight,
• 05:55contributions that faculty make to
• 05:57organizational
• 05:59or community well-being and climate.
• 06:03Related to this, there is
• 06:05a, there is a document
• 06:06on the OAPD website
• 06:08that summarizes the different activities
• 06:11and accomplishments
• 06:12expected for faculty on the
• 06:13different tracks.
• 06:16It includes
• 06:17guidance on performance metrics for
• 06:19advancement that are most important
• 06:21for each of the five
• 06:22ladder tracks. I think we
• 06:23did a little bit of
• 06:24a presentation on that in
• 06:25a prior talk.
• 06:27But one thing is that
• 06:28if you, if you look
• 06:29at the bottom of that
• 06:30form,
• 06:31you'll see that it includes
• 06:32guidance.
• 06:33In addition to the performance
• 06:34metrics,
• 06:37that it includes guidance around
• 06:39professionalism,
• 06:40expectations.
• 06:42And that is that all
• 06:43faculty are expected to uphold
• 06:45the standards of conduct and
• 06:46the mission and values
• 06:48of the school and that
• 06:49there should be,
• 06:50evidence at the time of
• 06:51promotion of continued contributions
• 06:54to, the diversity success and
• 06:56well-being of the academic community.
• 06:58And this is really an
• 07:00expectation
• 07:01of faculty of all ranks
• 07:02and tracks.
• 07:04Evidence of excellence in this
• 07:06area doesn't substitute for excellence
• 07:08in the more traditional domains
• 07:10of academic medicine,
• 07:11but it can greatly,
• 07:13enhance the review process if,
• 07:15particularly if the evaluators
• 07:17are commenting on your professionalism,
• 07:19your role modeling,
• 07:21or your and your citizenship.
• 07:23With
• 07:25the CV2,
• 07:28for the sections that you'll
• 07:29be completing,
• 07:31the clinical educational and research
• 07:33scholarship sections. I'll go over
• 07:35in a minute.
• 07:36You should exclude
• 07:38anything or any section that
• 07:40is not applicable to your
• 07:42faculty position,
• 07:43track or rank.
• 07:45So we really encourage you
• 07:46to focus on what you
• 07:48do and not on what
• 07:49you don't do in your
• 07:50position.
• 07:51For example,
• 07:53research rank,
• 07:54and many traditional investigator track
• 07:56faculty,
• 07:58do not have clinical responsibilities.
• 08:01So you don't need to
• 08:02include the clinical section of
• 08:04your CV2.
• 08:06You don't need to put
• 08:07the label of it and
• 08:08then say I don't engage
• 08:09in these activities. You can
• 08:11just leave that entire section
• 08:12out. And many, investigator track
• 08:15faculty don't do a lot
• 08:17of didactic or clinical teaching.
• 08:20And so their section may
• 08:21only be summarizing mentoring,
• 08:23that they do have research
• 08:25trainees or junior faculty.
• 08:27And then academic clinician track
• 08:29faculty,
• 08:31who have minimal or no
• 08:32research activities can omit that
• 08:34section entirely.
• 08:36And as I'll repeat in
• 08:38a minute, you do not
• 08:39need to submit,
• 08:41PDF papers if you're on
• 08:42the academic clinician track.
• 08:46So this is a template
• 08:48slide of what the, our,
• 08:50our current version,
• 08:52of the CV two looks
• 08:53like in terms of the
• 08:54different,
• 08:55required,
• 08:56sections.
• 08:58Depending again on your, on
• 08:59your track.
• 09:01The, the section a, which
• 09:03is the narrative descriptions.
• 09:05This will only include text
• 09:07as full sentence paragraphs. We
• 09:09don't like bulleted lists within
• 09:11this section,
• 09:13but really, sort of tell
• 09:14it as a story with
• 09:15paragraphs or you can have
• 09:17subheadings,
• 09:18of your choosing if that
• 09:20helps you organize,
• 09:21the presentation of your academic
• 09:24activities.
• 09:25Section A should not include
• 09:27tables or figures
• 09:29or detailed lists or links.
• 09:31All of that information can
• 09:33be listed in section B,
• 09:34which I'll go over in
• 09:35a minute.
• 09:37Section A will have two
• 09:39overview statements.
• 09:40Each of those are one
• 09:41hundred and fifty words,
• 09:43and that limit is,
• 09:46is really true for both
• 09:47the statements. And for the
• 09:49last three sections, clinical educational
• 09:52and research scholarship,
• 09:53the word limit is five
• 09:55hundred words.
• 09:58So this, the first introductory
• 10:00overview statement is essentially the
• 10:02same from
• 10:03the prior two versions of
• 10:05CV two or CV supplement.
• 10:08But we've just renamed it
• 10:09as being an overview of,
• 10:10of responsibilities
• 10:12and contributions.
• 10:14For promotion to associate professor
• 10:16and professor,
• 10:17this narrative needs to be
• 10:19a really strong and concise
• 10:21statement about your areas of
• 10:23expertise and leadership.
• 10:26It should describe the extent
• 10:28to which,
• 10:29this is recognized
• 10:30within and beyond Yale.
• 10:33And, to talk about the
• 10:34importance or impact of, of
• 10:36your work or your roles.
• 10:38This is, not the time
• 10:41for false modesty
• 10:42or to be underselling yourself.
• 10:45It should read more like,
• 10:48how you might describe yourself
• 10:49as a candidate for an
• 10:51award,
• 10:52or in a grant application
• 10:54or a cover letter for
• 10:55a job is is how
• 10:56I like to
• 10:57encourage people to think about
• 10:58how they would write it,
• 10:59really putting your strongest foot
• 11:02forward.
• 11:03You want to really emphasize
• 11:05the areas of work or
• 11:06specialized focus that you currently
• 11:08lead
• 11:09or in which you're making
• 11:10really substantive contributions.
• 11:13And it's really important that
• 11:15how you describe this in
• 11:16the short amount of space
• 11:18that you have is is
• 11:20aligned with your faculty track,
• 11:23and, is aligned with your
• 11:25local regional and in many
• 11:27cases national recognition and reputation.
• 11:30So for example, if you
• 11:32are, on the academic clinician
• 11:35track, your first sentence wouldn't
• 11:37be about your research contributions.
• 11:40You might include it in
• 11:41this section or you might
• 11:42not.
• 11:43Likewise, if you were on
• 11:45one of the research intensive
• 11:46ladder tracks, if you were
• 11:48a tenure track faculty member,
• 11:50for example, or clinician scientists,
• 11:52you wouldn't typically lead off
• 11:54with a description of your
• 11:55clinical
• 11:56activities. You'd lead off with
• 11:57your major research contributions
• 12:00and, because that's really what
• 12:02you're being evaluated
• 12:03for primarily,
• 12:05when you're going up for
• 12:06promotion.
• 12:08The second,
• 12:09narrative overview statement, also one
• 12:11hundred and fifty words,
• 12:12is the, the newer one
• 12:14that we added a few
• 12:15years ago.
• 12:16And again, this relates to
• 12:19our, our belief that an
• 12:21important component of faculty excellence
• 12:23involves contributions that you make,
• 12:26beyond yourself to support our
• 12:28academic community mission,
• 12:30and the broader team that
• 12:31you work with.
• 12:33So this really provides you
• 12:34an opportunity to try to
• 12:36capture that briefly.
• 12:38You are asked to provide
• 12:39a description of your most
• 12:41significant, innovative or impactful contributions
• 12:44in any of these kind
• 12:45of bulleted,
• 12:47areas below or other areas
• 12:49that are contributing to,
• 12:51organizational
• 12:53or personal well-being of your
• 12:54colleagues.
• 12:56And if this is really
• 12:57a significant
• 12:58part of your clinical
• 13:00educational or research identity and
• 13:03reputation in the field, you
• 13:04can, you can always
• 13:06expand on that in each
• 13:07of the later sections,
• 13:09that I'll review next.
• 13:13So I'm just going to
• 13:14go through each of these,
• 13:16three narrative sections on the
• 13:18ones clinical, educational
• 13:20and research activities. And again,
• 13:22you have a maximum five
• 13:23hundred words here, but if
• 13:25one of these areas is
• 13:26not something you do, you
• 13:27can leave it out entirely
• 13:29or if it's a rather
• 13:30minimal,
• 13:32minimal amount of what you
• 13:33spend your effort on, it
• 13:34can be shorter. You don't
• 13:36have to write five hundred
• 13:37words. That's really the maximum.
• 13:40So, after those introductory statements,
• 13:44this first five hundred word
• 13:46description will be of your
• 13:48clinical activities.
• 13:50We don't with this revised
• 13:52version that we've been using
• 13:53for a few years, we
• 13:54don't have required subsections
• 13:56here like we used to.
• 13:58So the ones that I
• 13:59put up here that are
• 14:00in bold are only suggested
• 14:02areas,
• 14:03that might help you organize,
• 14:06some of the nature of
• 14:07your activities. Again, you don't
• 14:09need to use these subsection
• 14:11labels.
• 14:13You can create ones that
• 14:14better organize,
• 14:16your clinically oriented responsibilities
• 14:18reputation
• 14:19or if you prefer, you
• 14:20don't have to have subheadings
• 14:22at all.
• 14:23However you do it,
• 14:25we really encourage people, to
• 14:27do two things is to
• 14:28really try to lead off
• 14:30with your most significant
• 14:32contributions.
• 14:33Don't bury them at the
• 14:34end of the section when
• 14:36reviewers attention spans tend to
• 14:38wane a bit. So you
• 14:39want to kind of lead
• 14:40with your strengths,
• 14:42and to try to keep
• 14:43it relatively
• 14:44higher level of sort of
• 14:46major
• 14:47clinical roles, activities and expertise.
• 14:51How those really,
• 14:52reinforce your clinical reputation within
• 14:55and beyond Yale.
• 14:57And, again, if you don't
• 14:59do a this as a
• 15:00as a big part of
• 15:01your activity, you don't need
• 15:03to strain to make this
• 15:04more than it is.
• 15:07Again, if,
• 15:08work that you're doing on
• 15:10community well-being,
• 15:12is, is an important part
• 15:14of your, of your position,
• 15:16You can expand on that
• 15:17within this, five hundred words
• 15:20narrative.
• 15:22Likewise, for the educational activities
• 15:24narrative, again, it's five hundred
• 15:26words.
• 15:27And again, you can use
• 15:29these subheads or create your
• 15:31own or don't use subheads
• 15:32at all.
• 15:35Again, with five with five
• 15:36hundred words, you know, sometimes
• 15:38people
• 15:39find it's helpful to have
• 15:40some way of organizing that
• 15:42for,
• 15:43for a reviewer so that
• 15:44they can really zero in
• 15:46on that. You could you
• 15:47could be more,
• 15:49descriptive within the subheadings as
• 15:51well. You don't have to
• 15:52keep it, kind of broad
• 15:54like this if you really
• 15:55want to drive home,
• 15:56particular areas of of educational,
• 16:00expertise or focus.
• 16:02However you do it again,
• 16:03you want to try to
• 16:04lead with your strengths here,
• 16:06keep it as high, higher
• 16:07level as you can,
• 16:09about your educational roles, activities,
• 16:12and expertise.
• 16:14If teaching is a really
• 16:15important part of what you
• 16:16do,
• 16:18we find that reviewers appreciate
• 16:20hearing a little bit about
• 16:21your educational or teaching philosophy,
• 16:24how, in terms of how
• 16:25you approach,
• 16:27you know, the education of
• 16:28diverse learners or learners who
• 16:30are at different stages of
• 16:32training, you know, how you
• 16:33approach medical or graduate students
• 16:35versus
• 16:36residents and fellows or postdocs.
• 16:41Again, as with the clinical
• 16:42section,
• 16:43you have the option of
• 16:44expanding on and integrating,
• 16:47any of those activities that
• 16:49are promoting
• 16:50sort of well-being and organizational,
• 16:54health.
• 16:55So things that are focused
• 16:57on promoting collaborative
• 16:58excellence or leadership and professionalism
• 17:02within education
• 17:03or
• 17:04work that you're doing mentoring,
• 17:06trainees who are underrepresented
• 17:08in medicine or work that
• 17:10you really try to do
• 17:11or your teaching philosophy
• 17:13really focuses on establishing inclusive
• 17:15learning environments.
• 17:17This would really be the
• 17:18place to expand on that
• 17:19if that's sort of a
• 17:21a part of your of
• 17:22your academic identity.
• 17:25And then the, the last
• 17:27narrative section,
• 17:28is on research and,
• 17:30I'll review in a few
• 17:32slides,
• 17:33kind of what the data
• 17:34is that you would include
• 17:36within this.
• 17:37This, this is the one
• 17:38section that really hasn't changed
• 17:39very much over the years.
• 17:43It's it's it's essentially the
• 17:44same as the prior version
• 17:45of of CB2.
• 17:47This is really going to
• 17:48be the narrative summary of
• 17:49your, your research and scholarship.
• 17:51And, and again, you want
• 17:53to focus most on, the
• 17:55most significant or innovative contributions
• 17:58or the highest impact kind
• 18:00of papers or
• 18:01really high impact,
• 18:04projects that you've been involved
• 18:05in or grants that you've
• 18:06gotten. So you can you
• 18:08can summarize,
• 18:10sort of your history of
• 18:11grant support,
• 18:13that again in the CV,
• 18:15CV, you're gonna list that
• 18:16with all of the details
• 18:18associated with that. But here's
• 18:20sort of an opportunity to
• 18:21kind of
• 18:22knit together those different research
• 18:24projects and particularly as they,
• 18:27cohere around,
• 18:29kind of a scholarly theme
• 18:30that is a part of
• 18:32defining your reputation.
• 18:34I would say for this
• 18:36section,
• 18:37coherence
• 18:38of focus is probably more
• 18:40important,
• 18:42than listing every single research
• 18:44project that you've had
• 18:46a role in.
• 18:48You know, sometimes when people
• 18:49do that and the projects
• 18:51are quite varied, reviewers struggle
• 18:54to kind of get a
• 18:55sense of what your,
• 18:57your scholarly niches or where
• 18:59you're contributing to the,
• 19:01to the research literature.
• 19:04But again, it's okay to
• 19:05have more than one, but
• 19:06if you, if you have
• 19:07like ten different things and
• 19:09reviewers have a difficult time
• 19:11getting a sense of who
• 19:12you are as a scientist
• 19:13or as a scholar,
• 19:15that can kind of weaken
• 19:16the section.
• 19:18And, and as above, if
• 19:19you,
• 19:20if your work focuses on,
• 19:23you know, you know, issues
• 19:25of diversity or inclusive excellence
• 19:27or health disparities,
• 19:29or promotion of inclusive research
• 19:31practices, this would be a
• 19:33good place to,
• 19:35expand on that a bit.
• 19:39Okay. So,
• 19:41transitioning
• 19:42to the data section or
• 19:44what we call section B.
• 19:47I will kind
• 19:48of quickly
• 19:50review
• 19:51the different sections. And,
• 19:54and again, this in this,
• 19:56CV2,
• 19:57with the exception of the
• 19:58research scholarship section, you have
• 20:01a,
• 20:02some flexibility
• 20:03in how you present the
• 20:04data and some of that
• 20:06will really depend on what
• 20:07kinds of,
• 20:09you know, summaries you can
• 20:10provide or data can be
• 20:12provided from your department, particularly
• 20:14around clinical activities.
• 20:19The first section of it
• 20:20is, and people sometimes struggle
• 20:22with this,
• 20:24is there's
• 20:25a part in there which
• 20:26lists percent effort.
• 20:28This sometimes gets a fair
• 20:30amount of questions and we
• 20:31hope we've explained it in
• 20:33our guidance document on the
• 20:34OAPD website,
• 20:36something that, Doctor. Grauer,
• 20:38spent some time trying to
• 20:39do, particularly around
• 20:41how to capture,
• 20:43clinical effort,
• 20:45that, that you're doing that's
• 20:47with or without trainees
• 20:48present. Because a lot of
• 20:50times that can fall into
• 20:51either the clinical or the
• 20:52educational effort. So I won't
• 20:54go into that in great
• 20:55detail here, but we have
• 20:57sort of an explanation of
• 20:58how to
• 20:59capture,
• 21:00your percent of time,
• 21:02when you're doing education
• 21:04when you're doing clinical activities
• 21:05when you have trainees present.
• 21:10So for the first
• 21:11major section, which again is
• 21:13going to be the data
• 21:14that supports your,
• 21:16your clinical activities. I think
• 21:18on our website, we may
• 21:19have an example about kind
• 21:21of a table of clinical
• 21:22activities that was really part
• 21:24of the prior version of
• 21:26CV two.
• 21:28So people will, sometimes list,
• 21:30you know, different,
• 21:32clinics that they do or
• 21:33different locations where they're doing
• 21:35practice.
• 21:37You know, sort of how
• 21:38many hours, you know, where
• 21:39that is.
• 21:41And, and they may also
• 21:43include,
• 21:44clinical dashboards or reports that
• 21:46can be provided,
• 21:48by your department.
• 21:49If you're in a department
• 21:50that is, you know, you
• 21:51know, fairly RVU based,
• 21:54you know, sometimes,
• 21:55we just had a case
• 21:56where the person had a
• 21:57very detailed
• 21:59report of their,
• 22:00of their clinical productivity that
• 22:02was included within this section.
• 22:04We don't see that all
• 22:06that often, but that
• 22:08is certainly something that we're
• 22:09hoping would happen as, as
• 22:11our data systems have evolved
• 22:13and people can generate those
• 22:14kinds of reports about their,
• 22:15their clinical productivity.
• 22:18This is also an area
• 22:20if you are, for example,
• 22:22involved in a lot of,
• 22:23you know, quality improvement work,
• 22:26or you're involved in
• 22:28creating care pathways and this
• 22:30is really an important part
• 22:31of what you do.
• 22:33This can be a a
• 22:33good place to either create
• 22:35a table
• 22:36or or provide bulleted lists
• 22:38of different types of,
• 22:40you know, quality and safety
• 22:41or other kinds of performance
• 22:43improvement kind of work that
• 22:45you're doing.
• 22:47So typically, you would have
• 22:48some if this is a
• 22:49big part of what you
• 22:50do, you would typically have
• 22:51maybe even a paragraph about
• 22:53this
• 22:54in the clinical narrative section.
• 22:56And then here, you might
• 22:57provide an a sort of
• 22:59a listing of of some
• 23:00of the projects that you've
• 23:01either
• 23:02led, or been involved with.
• 23:05The educational,
• 23:07data section,
• 23:10we have, I think, on
• 23:11the website, Jonathan can correct
• 23:12me if I'm wrong later,
• 23:15kept sort of examples of
• 23:16what were table two and
• 23:18table three from the prior
• 23:19version.
• 23:21One of the tables is
• 23:22for kind of listing out
• 23:24your didactic seminar teaching or
• 23:26when you're teaching
• 23:28sections within a course or
• 23:30occasional lectures. And then there's
• 23:32another table that people can
• 23:34use where they can create
• 23:35a list
• 23:37of the clinical teaching or
• 23:38supervision that they do.
• 23:40And then another way for
• 23:42listing,
• 23:43your precepting or mentoring of
• 23:45trainees.
• 23:47What we ask for people
• 23:48is that,
• 23:50you only include these Yale
• 23:52educational activities that you've done
• 23:54in the past five years
• 23:56in this section.
• 23:57And which is really important
• 23:59if if education is a
• 24:00really big part of what
• 24:02you do.
• 24:03We find that, you know,
• 24:04the longer this gets with
• 24:06the listing of every single
• 24:07individual talk that that, people
• 24:10provide, the more our reviewers
• 24:12tend to just kind of
• 24:13gloss over that. We really
• 24:14don't want people to,
• 24:16to kind of do that.
• 24:18So again, you would, you
• 24:20don't have to list every
• 24:21single activity that you do.
• 24:23Like if there's a talk
• 24:24that you do repeatedly,
• 24:26you know, you know, several
• 24:27times a year in different,
• 24:29settings, you can include that
• 24:31as sort of a single
• 24:32line and then just sort
• 24:34of list the dates that
• 24:35you do that rather than
• 24:36repeatedly listing the talk.
• 24:39So we we kind of
• 24:40discourage people from having these
• 24:41sort of long list of
• 24:43each, sort of individual presentation
• 24:45that they do for for
• 24:47trainees and try to group
• 24:48them together in in in
• 24:50some way.
• 24:51You wanna, I think particularly
• 24:53highlight if you are actually
• 24:54teaching
• 24:55or co teaching an entire
• 24:56course that should really,
• 24:58get emphasized here.
• 25:01Reviewers,
• 25:02definitely recognize that as a
• 25:03really major commitment of people's
• 25:05time.
• 25:07If you have,
• 25:10you know, are very involved
• 25:12in mentoring of trainees or
• 25:14junior faculty, this would be
• 25:16the place that you would
• 25:17list this.
• 25:19There's a suggested way of
• 25:21listing,
• 25:22you know, people that you've
• 25:23served as a primary mentor
• 25:25for,
• 25:26so that you can do
• 25:27a kind of a brief
• 25:28summary of projects that you've
• 25:30mentored them on. They've gotten
• 25:32awards,
• 25:33if they're now in a
• 25:34faculty position,
• 25:36things like that to really,
• 25:38demonstrate the ways in which
• 25:40you've impacted their career.
• 25:42We really discourage people from
• 25:45list, from listing
• 25:47every single person that you've
• 25:49met with a few times,
• 25:52for,
• 25:52for mentoring or career advice
• 25:54and to really focus,
• 25:56you know, mostly on people
• 25:57for whom you've served as
• 25:58a primary or a really
• 26:00substantial,
• 26:01secondary mentor,
• 26:03in the kind of thing
• 26:04where if someone were to
• 26:05ask that person who was,
• 26:07who was one of your
• 26:08primary mentors, they would, they
• 26:09would name you. So if
• 26:11it's, you know, again, if
• 26:11it's someone that you've, you
• 26:13know, Kate, you know,
• 26:14once or twice a year
• 26:16meet with them, that that
• 26:17is that's probably not what
• 26:18we're meaning when we talk
• 26:20about, sort of a mentor.
• 26:22You can also include in
• 26:24here data related to your
• 26:26involvement in curricula or educational
• 26:29training program development.
• 26:31And then finally,
• 26:33your department
• 26:35will help you kind of
• 26:37pull teaching evaluations
• 26:39together.
• 26:40We don't expect you to
• 26:41do that and you should
• 26:43not be
• 26:44including them within your dossier.
• 26:46Your department will do that.
• 26:48And and you should not
• 26:49be including,
• 26:50excerpted quotes from,
• 26:53from teaching evaluations,
• 26:55in in this section.
• 26:56Reviewers tend to, you know,
• 26:58kind of view those as,
• 27:00kind of cherry picking when
• 27:02people do when go into
• 27:03their own teaching evaluations and
• 27:05then pull them out. You're
• 27:06you're better off,
• 27:08having the full teaching record
• 27:10and then have your reviewers
• 27:11do the the plucking out.
• 27:13And they do that. I
• 27:14I mean, they really are
• 27:15reviewers are really looking for
• 27:17those, those glowing comments to
• 27:19kind of integrate in their,
• 27:21in their presentation,
• 27:23of your promotion.
• 27:25And then the last section,
• 27:27which is a research scholarly,
• 27:31section.
• 27:32This section,
• 27:33focuses almost entirely on providing
• 27:36brief
• 27:37descriptions
• 27:38of the,
• 27:39I should back up and
• 27:40say for people who are
• 27:43actively engaged in scholarship,
• 27:46they are,
• 27:48expected to include five,
• 27:50PDF papers,
• 27:52of their most important work
• 27:54as, as a first for
• 27:55senior author.
• 27:57For faculty who are on
• 27:58the academic clinician
• 27:59track, I think our experiences
• 28:01about
• 28:02a third to a half
• 28:04of them also include publications
• 28:07that that's not required.
• 28:09And I would say,
• 28:11if you're an academic clinician
• 28:13and the publications you're going
• 28:14to include your, you know,
• 28:16your your usually third or
• 28:17fourth author on all of
• 28:19those,
• 28:20you you probably don't need
• 28:21to include those. You can
• 28:22your how you have that
• 28:23listed in your CV is
• 28:25is best because the reviewers
• 28:27are are really wanting to,
• 28:30take a look at things
• 28:31that people have been first
• 28:32or last, author papers on.
• 28:34So when I've been a
• 28:36counsel people on which papers
• 28:37to select here,
• 28:39you know, usually
• 28:41there's definitely ones where your
• 28:42first or last author.
• 28:44I generally,
• 28:46also recommend that people choose,
• 28:48ones that have appeared in
• 28:49higher impact journals,
• 28:53or if all of the
• 28:54journals are about the same
• 28:56impact,
• 28:57are all, you know, specialty
• 28:58or subspecialty
• 28:59journals,
• 29:00then I'd say pick the
• 29:01ones that are most representative
• 29:03of your work.
• 29:05And also,
• 29:06it's good to have most
• 29:08of them be within the
• 29:10past five years.
• 29:12I think it doesn't help
• 29:13people too much if the
• 29:15the five papers,
• 29:16even if they're they're really
• 29:18high impact publications, but they're
• 29:19like from seven or eight
• 29:20years ago.
• 29:22Your reviewers are wanting to
• 29:23see kind of where where
• 29:24you're going with your scholarship
• 29:26now,
• 29:28I generally recommend there's there's
• 29:30no
• 29:31requirement
• 29:32on this, but I generally
• 29:33recommend that at least half
• 29:35of these
• 29:36papers be journal articles.
• 29:39And then the other the
• 29:40other if if you're on
• 29:41the research, if you're a
• 29:42clinician scientist investigator traditional track,
• 29:45I generally recommend
• 29:47that either all of them
• 29:48be,
• 29:49research, journal publications or you
• 29:51could have maybe four of
• 29:52them. And then if you
• 29:53wrote a chapter that sort
• 29:55of summarizes your area of
• 29:56research, that'd be fine.
• 29:58For the clinician educator scholars,
• 30:01it can be kind of
• 30:02half and half.
• 30:03You do wanna have some
• 30:05research journal articles,
• 30:07but you can also have
• 30:08chapters or,
• 30:10the other types of scholarship
• 30:12that are highly valued on
• 30:13the clinician educator scholar track.
• 30:16And then with the five
• 30:17that you choose,
• 30:19we ask that you provide
• 30:20a a one hundred word
• 30:22up to one hundred word,
• 30:24kind of paragraph that summarizes,
• 30:27the importance of that paper,
• 30:29how it's relevant to your
• 30:31particular,
• 30:32you know, scholarly focus.
• 30:34You know, if it's had,
• 30:36if it's been well cited,
• 30:38you know, you can include
• 30:39information with regard to,
• 30:41kind of, impact.
• 30:44The last thing is we
• 30:45don't,
• 30:46there there is a section
• 30:47in here where you can
• 30:48list research
• 30:49collaborations you have.
• 30:51We generally
• 30:53what we,
• 30:55expect that people would do
• 30:56here is they they would
• 30:57list this when they've got
• 30:59extensive collaborations
• 31:00with faculty,
• 31:02who are either outside of
• 31:04Yale
• 31:05or are in other departments
• 31:06at Yale.
• 31:08You can create sort of
• 31:09a short table that lists
• 31:10that with the projects that
• 31:11you're a collaborator on.
• 31:14Most people don't include this,
• 31:16but when they do, it's
• 31:17usually because they they have
• 31:18extensive
• 31:19collaborations and they want to
• 31:21be able to to summarize
• 31:22that.
• 31:24We don't want people including
• 31:25a table where you list
• 31:26every person that you've collaborated
• 31:27within your department. Most reviewers
• 31:27are expecting that slide
• 31:29before we open it up
• 31:32for whatever questions you have.
• 31:41Slide before we open it
• 31:42up for whatever questions you
• 31:43have.
• 31:45Just some I think Jonathan
• 31:47had a do's and don'ts
• 31:48for CV when he did
• 31:50his last month, and so
• 31:51these are this is the
• 31:52do's and don'ts for for
• 31:54CV part two.
• 31:57As just first, as I
• 31:59I said before,
• 32:01you know, the biggest do
• 32:03is that I urge people,
• 32:05to really speak at a
• 32:06high level
• 32:07about their work and to
• 32:08speak highly of themselves.
• 32:11If that's something that is
• 32:12a real challenge for you,
• 32:15it's really helpful to rely
• 32:17on a mentor or a
• 32:18colleague who can,
• 32:20who thinks highly of you
• 32:21and and, and and can
• 32:23kind of coach you into
• 32:26really doing a better job
• 32:28of showcasing
• 32:29your many talents.
• 32:32The other way that some
• 32:33sometimes people don't kind of
• 32:34highlight things or their their
• 32:36importance is
• 32:38they they'll get so lost
• 32:40in the detail of listing
• 32:41things through the minutiae
• 32:43that who they are and
• 32:45what they've been doing gets
• 32:46a little bit lost in
• 32:47that.
• 32:49I've I've had a couple
• 32:50people over the years who
• 32:51are who are
• 32:54incredibly talented, but one talent
• 32:56that they don't have is
• 32:57writing about highly about themselves.
• 33:00And so in those sort
• 33:00of extreme
• 33:02cases, I've actually had people,
• 33:05write
• 33:06their sections as if it
• 33:07was in the third person
• 33:09as if it was somebody
• 33:10writing
• 33:11a recommendation
• 33:12about you about your clinical
• 33:13educational and scholarly,
• 33:16accomplishments.
• 33:17Almost like a letter of
• 33:18recommendation
• 33:19from,
• 33:20your your your favorite mentor
• 33:22who who wants you to
• 33:23succeed in academia
• 33:25and write it that way.
• 33:27And then go back into
• 33:28it afterwards and convert it
• 33:30over to first person and
• 33:32and only,
• 33:34you know, remove things that
• 33:35you feel absolutely uncomfortable
• 33:38saying, so positively about yourself.
• 33:41But, just to say is
• 33:42that reviewers are used to
• 33:44seeing people,
• 33:47essentially speak highly of themselves.
• 33:48They expect it.
• 33:50You don't want to go,
• 33:51you know, say anything that
• 33:52isn't true or get go
• 33:54so over the top with
• 33:55it. But usually when people
• 33:57make the mistake mistakes here,
• 33:59it's by not
• 34:00saying things as highly as
• 34:01they can.
• 34:03Just,
• 34:05another thing that we've sometimes
• 34:06seen is,
• 34:07sometimes people will include hyperlinks
• 34:10to either papers or projects
• 34:12or things that are on
• 34:13professional organization websites.
• 34:16The first thing I'd say
• 34:17is don't include those
• 34:18in your narratives.
• 34:20You really want people to
• 34:22kind of stay in story
• 34:24about you
• 34:25and anything that kind of
• 34:27takes them away from that
• 34:28into something else where where
• 34:29there's all kinds of other
• 34:30resources or other or other
• 34:32people
• 34:33are being showcased,
• 34:35and you maybe even get
• 34:36a little bit lost in
• 34:37the sauce is not a
• 34:38good idea. So if you
• 34:40really do want want,
• 34:42reviewers to,
• 34:44be able to access something
• 34:45that you've done, I would
• 34:46do that in the data
• 34:47section.
• 34:49But really make sure that,
• 34:51you know, the link is
• 34:52active,
• 34:53that they don't need to
• 34:54be a member of the
• 34:55professional organization
• 34:57where that
• 34:58information is located to be
• 35:00able to access it. It's
• 35:01it's frustrating when reviewers click
• 35:03something and then they can't
• 35:05get to it. So make
• 35:06sure that that's all checked
• 35:07out.
• 35:09And also I think I've
• 35:11said is, you know, don't
• 35:12put data in your narratives
• 35:14and and don't put
• 35:17don't put narratives in your
• 35:19data. So
• 35:20section b really should be
• 35:21tables, lists, dashboards,
• 35:24bulleted
• 35:25things, or citations.
• 35:27It should not have narrative
• 35:29paragraphs in it and likewise,
• 35:31section a,
• 35:32shouldn't be including the data
• 35:33in there.
• 35:35And,
• 35:35and as I as I
• 35:37said, it's your department's responsibility
• 35:39to
• 35:40pull in your entire teaching
• 35:42ratings.
• 35:43And,
• 35:44we really encourage people,
• 35:47and and and and I
• 35:48think a talk we have
• 35:49next month,
• 35:51we'll talk a little bit
• 35:52more about this, is that
• 35:53your department is there to
• 35:55support this, but it's really
• 35:57your responsibility
• 35:58to make sure that your
• 35:59department is either getting those
• 36:00evaluations
• 36:01done. And if they're not,
• 36:04you know, consult with one
• 36:06of us or or someone
• 36:07in, Jessica Luzi's office and
• 36:10their
• 36:10center for medical education about
• 36:12how you can,
• 36:14go about collecting
• 36:16teaching evaluations
• 36:18yourself in a way that
• 36:19is,
• 36:21you you know, that that's
• 36:21sort of reliable and valid.