Promotion criteria for clinician-educators in the United States and Canada. A survey of promotion committee chairpersons
B. W. Beasley, S. M. Wright, J. Cofrancesco Jr, S. F. Babbott, P. A. Thomas and E. B. Bass
Division of General Internal Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Md, USA. bbeasley@kumc.edu
CONTEXT: Clinician-educators have concerns about their ability to be
promoted and the criteria used by medical school promotion committees.
OBJECTIVE: To discover the criteria and methods that medical school
promotion committees use to make decisions about the promotion of
clinician-educators. METHODS: In June 1996 we mailed a questionnaire to
chairpersons of all medical school promotion committees in the United
States and Canada. RESULTS: Of 142 schools surveyed, 115 (81%) responded;
45% of respondents had a clinician-educator promotion track. On a scale
from 1 (minimally important) to 7 (extremely important), the mean
importance ratings of aspects of clinician-educators' performance were the
following: teaching skills (6.3), clinical skills (5.8), mentoring (5.7),
academic administration (5.3), developing educational programs (5.3),
nonresearch scholarship (5.1), clinical research (4.8), service
coordination (4.7), and education research (4.5). Methods to evaluate each
aspect of performance were rated by respondents for importance and
frequency of use. The 4 most important methods for evaluating teaching were
awards, peer evaluation, learner evaluation, and teaching portfolio; 70% or
more of schools used these frequently or always. The 4 most important
methods of evaluating clinical skills were peer evaluation, awards, trainee
evaluation, and objective measures, which were used frequently or always by
78%, 65%, 58%, and 29% of schools, respectively. Clinician-educators were
expected to have fewer peer-reviewed publications to be promoted than
investigators (5.7 vs 10.6, P<.001). Schools with separate
clinician-educator tracks differed little in survey responses from schools
without such tracks. CONCLUSION: Most, but not all, promotion committees
now assign high importance to the special contributions of
clinician-educators and use a variety of methods to assess these,
regardless of whether they have a separate clinician-educator promotion
track.
A Career in Surgical Oncology: Finding Meaning, Balance, and Personal Satisfaction
Shanafelt
Ann. Surg. Oncol. 2008;15:400-406.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Developing the Careers of Clinician-Educators in Psychiatry
Bennett et al.
Acad. Psychiatry 2007;31:57-60.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Shaping Your Career to Maximize Personal Satisfaction in the Practice of Oncology
Shanafelt et al.
JCO 2006;24:4020-4026.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Recruiting and Rewarding Faculty for Medical Student Teaching
Pessar et al.
Acad. Psychiatry 2006;30:126-129.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Fellows as Teachers: The Teacher-Assistant Experience During Pulmonary Subspecialty Training*
Kempainen et al.
Chest 2005;128:401-406.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
What Is an Academic General Internist?: Career Options and Training Pathways
Levinson and Linzer
JAMA 2002;288:2045-2048.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Portfolios as a Novel Approach for Residency Evaluation
O'Sullivan et al.
Acad. Psychiatry 2002;26:173-179.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Attitudes of Clinical Faculty About Career Progress, Career Success and Recognition, and Commitment to Academic Medicine: Results of a Survey
Buckley et al.
Arch Intern Med 2000;160:2625-2629.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Capturing zebras: what to do with a reportable case
Wright and Kouroukis
CMAJ 2000;163:429-431.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Mission Critical -- Integrating Clinician-Educators into Academic Medical Centers
Levinson and Rubenstein
NEJM 1999;341:840-843.
FULL TEXT
Attending-Physician Role Models
Aron et al.
NEJM 1999;340:1598-1599.
FULL TEXT
Attributes of Excellent Attending-Physician Role Models
Wright et al.
NEJM 1998;339:1986-1993.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Promotion Criteria for Clinician-Educators
Stotland et al.
JAMA 1998;279:116-116.
FULL TEXT
