Skip to main content

Associate Professor Clinician Scholar Track Criteria (Pre 2015)

Basic Requirements

The major criterion for appointment or promotion to the rank of Associate Professor is the demonstration of independence in the areas of scholarship and teaching. Promotion should be based on performance rather than time in previous rank. Usually, however, a time period of five years in rank as an Instructor or Assistant Professor is required to attain the necessary level of achievement (i.e., review for promotion will take place in the sixth year).

Teaching: Using teaching schedules, evaluations or other materials the individual:

  • Should demonstrate a continuing commitment to teaching. Some examples of this commitment are:
    • Mentoring medical students, other students, and residents.
    • Lecturing in the medical student curriculum and/or other academic programs.
    • Lecturing at grand rounds and other local teaching sessions.
    • Developing/directing regional postgraduate course.
  • Should interact with trainees one-on-one in a positive way.
  • Should have demonstrated success in teaching. Some examples of this success are:
    • Achieving above average teaching evaluations.
    • Winning a teaching award.
    • Serving as a visiting professor at other institutions.

Administration: The individual should have competently discharged assignments on departmental, School of Medicine, hospital or institutional committees.

Clinical: The individual:

  • Should be recognized by peers, immediate supervisors and community physicians as having excellent clinical skills and performance. Some examples of this recognition are:
    • Acting as a consulting physician.
    • Devising a new method or procedure.
  • Should devote a minimum of 50 percent of time to clinical activity. (This minimum is a guideline and may be decreased for those individuals who have significant administrative, teaching, or service responsibilities.)

Scholarship: The individual:

  • Should have demonstrated evidence of being an independent scholar with a focused area of expertise.
  • Should have a national reputation for scholarship, attested by reference letters from outside the institution.
  • Should have high quality manuscripts published in peer-reviewed journals or should have made other equivalent scholarly contributions. In evaluating an individuals scholarly attainments an emphasis will be placed on peer-reviewed, hypothesis-testing manuscripts of a basic or clinical nature. However, the review committee may also consider other scholarly contributions when evaluating an individual. Other acceptable scholarly accomplishment includes but is not limited to (in no particular order):
    • Peer reviewed case reports.
    • Review articles.
    • Textbooks or chapters.
    • Editorial service.
    • Electronic media.
  • Should provide evidence of continuing scholarly productivity.