WELCOME TO THE OFFICE OF RESEARCH AFFAIRS 2015 ACADEMIC REVIEW WORKSHOP

1. WELCOME TO THE OFFICE OF RESEARCH AFFAIRS2015 ACADEMIC REVIEW WORKSHOP

2. Academic Affairs Staff Catherine Schumacher ORU - Academic Personnel Analyst Office of Research Affairs Atkinson Hall, Room 5401 / MC 0043 9500 Gilman Drive / La Jolla, CA 92093-0043 Tel: 858-822-1506 Email:  oru-academics@ucsd.edu Website:  http://blink.ucsd.edu/sponsor/ora/orupers/index.html David DeSpain (VC ORA Contact for Academic Issues) Academic Personnel Analyst Office of Research Affairs Student Services Bldg., Room 417/MC 0043 9500 Gilman Drive/ La Jolla, CA 92093-0043 Tel: 858-822-7510 Email: ora-ap@ucsd.edu

3. Overview of Workshop • Review Timetable for 2015 Review • Review of Senate Task Force on Faculty Awards II Report • Normal Periods of Service • New Bio Bib Format • Review Forms • Referee Form • Certifications • CV • 4th Year Appraisals for Research Scientists • 6th Year Readiness Assessments for Project and Research Scientists • Helpful Websites

4. 2014 Academic Review Timetable

5. Outcomes from the UCSD Academic Senate Task Force on Faculty Reward System II • Elimination of Crossover Step Criteria • Elimination of Step VI Letters • Bonus Off Scale (BOS) Proposal

6. Elimination of Crossover Step Criteria Senate Task Force on Faculty Rewards II Recommendation 16: Elimination of crossover step criteria • Crossover criteria (publications listed in Work In Progress) are no longer required for proposed actions effective 07/01/15. These actions are now at Dr. Brown’s authority and no committee review is required. Section C. Work In Progress should now only be used when needed for Appraisals or Promotions • Advancement to steps currently referred to as “crossover steps” should be treated similarly to advancement to any other step based on performance during the review period • As before, the academics that advanced to Assistant Step V or VI or Associate Step IV or V, may be proposed for advancement to either Associate or Full Steps II or III in the subsequent review period if proposed for promotion

7. Elimination of Step VI Letters Senate Task Force on Faculty Rewards II Recommendation 24: Elimination of external letters for advancement to Step VI • External letters are no longer required for proposed advancements to Step VI • ORU must be capable of mounting a case which curates the evidence of nationally or internationally recognized highly distinguished scholarship and highly meritorious service • ORU’s can choose to request external letters if they consider them necessary to demonstrate the impact and quality of the scholarship • CAP can also instruct the ORU to seek external letters

8. Awarding of Bonus as Single Payment Senate Task Force on Faculty Rewards II Recommendation 35B: Awarding of Bonus as Single Payment • BOS awards will no longer be paid as part of the annual salary, but instead as a single payment once a year or as one lump sum payment to cover the entire review period. The exact details are still being worked out with administrators at Academic Personnel • The BOS award will continue to terminate at the end of the review period and can be awarded at the next review period if merited • BOS may be accorded to reward: • outstanding service of individuals who lack adequate scholarly or creative achievement to deserve an academic step increase; • to respond (where appropriate) to outside offers, other than those driven by a market in a discipline or field When awarded as a bonus for service, the off-scale increment should be approximately equal to the total salary increment of the next higher step on the published salary scale or to an amount half-way between the relevant steps.

9. Normal Periods of Service Project/Research Scientist Series *4th Year Appraisal due for Assistant Research Scientists that were initially appointed at Step I (Unless there was a No-Change review at some point—then the 4th Year Appraisal should occur in the 4th academic year) **4th Year Appraisal due for Assistant Research Scientists that were initially appointed at Step II (Unless there was a No-Change review at some point—then the 4th Year Appraisal should occur in the 4th academic year) ***Used in exceptional situations. May be used in lieu of service at Associate Project/Research Scientist, Step I & II Assistant Project/Research Scientist have a maximum of 8 academic years to promote to Associate Project/Research Scientist

10. Normal Periods of Service Project/Research Scientist Series *PI Exception must be obtained at the Associate Project Scientist level. A Change in Series to the Research Scientist series should be considered if the individual has grant support as a PI or Co-PI or has a clearly defined leadership role in a large center or program project requiring relatively independent effort and/or expertise **Used in exceptional situations. May be used in lieu of service at Project/Research Scientist, Step I & II

11. Normal Periods of Service Project/Research Scientist Series *PI Exception must be obtained at the Project Scientist level. A Change in Series to the Research Scientist series should be considered if the individual has grant support as a PI or Co-PI or has a clearly defined leadership role in a large center or program project requiring relatively independent effort and/or expertise **Service at Step V may be for an indefinite duration, however Research and Project Scientists must be reviewed every 3 years at this level ***Granted on evidence of continuing great distinction, recognized nationally or internationally in scholarship. Continuing excellence and high merit in original scholarship and service

12. Upcoming Bio Bibl Changes • There will now be one Bio Bibl for all campus ORUs instead of the current practice of one Bio Bibl for those on the B/E/E pay scale and a separate bio bib for those not on the B/E/E pay scale • A new section entitled Additional Major Research Products (draft title) is being proposed as an addition to the Bio Bibl as section B.IV and is in the development stage for the 2015 review period • The new section will include a list of other works that have a significant impact to the academic field for the person reviewed: • Patents and patent licenses • Software, databases, websites • Devices, hardware, structures, fabrications • Research leading to legislative action, policies, business processes • More details will follow after the Metrics Committee (made up of several ORU Directors) has determined the criteria for the new section

13. List of Academic Review Forms to Review • Biography • Bibliography • Candidate’s Research Statement • Referee List

14. UCSD ACADEMIC BIOGRAPHY

15. UCSD ACADEMIC BIOGRAPHY

16. UCSD ACADEMIC BIOGRAPHY

17. UCSD ACADEMIC BIOGRAPHY List here students mentored outside of the structured classroom setting [List from oldest to newest with dates]: Undergraduate Research Students: Name of Student/Your role (thesis adviser, research adviser, etc.) Masters Students: Name of Student/Your role (thesis advisor, research adviser, etc.) Doctoral Students: Name of Student/Your Role (thesis advisor, research adviser, etc.) Post docs: Name of Academic/Your role Other (List): Name/Your Role Please file in the table below for number and type of exam committees you’ve served on throughout the review period:

18. Bibliography Section III - Bibliography A. PRIMARY PUBLISHED OR CREATIVE WORK • Refereed Journal Articles (These are the usual publications in refereed journals. Do not list here papers that have appeared in proceedings of conferences. Papers which are "in press" or formally "accepted" are listed here; "tentatively accepted" may be listed in category C below.) List from oldest to newest. • Books and Book Chapters (Encyclopedia entries should not be listed here. List them in B.IV Other Presentations/Works). List from oldest to newest. • Refereed Conference Proceedings (These are fully refereed conferences with proceedings distributed widely to members of the research community.Please include the acceptance rate for each conference, if available.)List from oldest to newest. B. OTHER WORK • Other Conference Proceedings (List the name of the Proceedings, the date of publication, and the page numbers of the article. If the paper was invited, one can append the entry with [invited paper]. Most conferences have program committees which provide a certain level of reviewing of submitted articles.) List from oldest to newest. • Abstracts of Non-refereed Conference Proceedings (Many international conferences publish a book of abstracts which is provided to the participants. This is the appropriate category for listing such contributions.) List from oldest to newest. • Other Presentations/Works • Additional Major Research Products (Please list other work of significant impact to your Academic Field.  [e.g., patents, patent licenses; software, databases, websites; devices, hardware, structures, fabrications; research leading to legislative action, policies, business processes].) List from oldest to newest. • WORK IN PROGRESS (Only use if actual materials will be forwarded with the review file. Discouraged unless the proposed action is an Appraisal.) List from oldest to newest.

19. Helpful Tips for Preparing Your Bibliography • The citations in each of the three Sections must be in chronological order, beginning with the earliest and ending with the most recent entry. • Ensure that each item appears only once on the bibliography. • Numbers assigned to citations are permanent and may not be moved or re-numbered once the format is established in Sections A and B. • Publications that were inadvertently omitted from the previous bibliography should be inserted in its chronological place without changing the existing numbering system. Instead, a letter (a, b, c) should be used instead of a number. A parenthetical explanation stating the item was omitted in error or inadvertently omitted last review should appear at the end of the citation. • Authors, titles, journal title, volumes, editors, pages, etc. MUST be listed on the bibliography EXACTLY as they appear on the publication. "Et al." may not be used in lieu of listing multiple authors. The inclusive page numbers and year of publication must follow each citation.

20. Helpful Tips for Preparing Your Bibliography • A. PRIMARY PUBLISHED WORK • Article Type • Research Articles • Peer Reviewed Books • Peer Reviewed Book Chapters • Peer Reviewed Review Articles • Peer Reviewed Abstracts • Peer Reviewed Conference Proceedings • Status • Published • In Press (must have documentation (email or letter) from publisher) • Accepted (must have documentation (email or letter) from publisher) • Section A consists of work published in the open literature (peer reviewed), which one may reasonably expect to find in libraries other than UCSD.

21. Helpful Tips for Preparing Your Bibliography • B. OTHER WORK • Type (Published, In Press, Accepted, or as Applicable for Section B.I) • All proposed listings for new • Section B.IV • Abstracts • Non-Refereed Conference Proceeding • Reviews • Monographs • Encyclopedia Entries • Thesis • Reports • Popular Articles • Editor • Editorials • Commentaries

22. Helpful Tips for Preparing Your Bibliography • C. WORK IN PROGRESS (Appraisals and for promotions when needed) • This section is for work that is submitted or in preparation only. You must submit a manuscript (in any shape or form) that are listed in this section • REPRINTS: • 1. Section A – Submit a copy of each reprint, galley proofs and/or publisher’s binding acceptance of entire corpus of all new material. • 2. Section B – not necessary for this section • 3. Section C – A manuscript in any shape or form is required

23. Candidate’s Research Statement Research and Scholarly Activities (You will receive a template from Catherine to assist you with your research statement) • Describe the focus of your research, notable observations, your specific role in collaborative research ventures, new grant funding and any additional noteworthy information. Specifically define your role (e.g. Principal or Co-Principal Investigator or head of a CORE program project), for each award. Also, explain your role on all new publications since your last review. If there are numerous publications, then explain your role on the most significant (first or senior authored). The research statement should be on average 2 to 3 pages in length University and Public Service • Describe areas of University/Public Service. Include your specific involvement, time commitment, and accomplishments • The research statement is a good place to thoroughly explain all of the particulars about your research and service that a reviewer cannot ascertain from just looking at your bio/bib • Tip: if you have an area of your file that is lacking, you should provide an explanation in your research statement on how it will be remedied before the next review period.

24. Referee List Everyone, in all series, who are proposed for promotion, above scale, or a change in series are required to submit a Referee List. Some things to remember: • Referees should be higher than your current rank • Referees May Not Include: - Collaborators within the last 10 years (Associate Research Full Research Scientists) - Anyone who served as your mentor within the last 10 years (Research Scientists)

25. CURRICULUM VITAE Your CV is sent with referee solicitation letters for those proposed for promotion or a change-in-series. Please make sure your CV is current and free from typos We also want to retain a current copy on file for all academics.

26. Certification A Those due for normal merit advancement must submit Certification A with their review documents. All others will be advised of the proposed action before it is voted on by the ORU. By signing Certification A, the candidate certifies that he or she was informed of the pending review and was given the opportunity to ask questions and provide pertinent information and evidence, to suggest names of referees (if applicable), and to review the material in the file.

27. Certification B Cert B is signed and datedafterthe ORU review of the file and prior to submission of the file. By signing Certification B, the candidate certifies that he or she has had the opportunity to review the completed file and the department's recommendations prior to submission of the file for campus review.

28. Certification C Cert C is signed by the candidate if material is added to the file after it is forwarded to the Dean’s Office and/or Academic Personnel Office.

29. Policy on 4th Year Appraisals for Research Scientists • An Assistant-rank Research Scientist appointee must receive an appraisal, which is a formal evaluation of his or her achievements and progress toward promotion in his/her 4th academic year. The appraisal also identifies appointees whose records of performance and achievement are below the level of excellence expected for Research Scientists. • An appraisal should provide an appointee with a careful, considered, analytical evaluation of his or her performance to date in the areas of research and creative work, professional competence and activity, and University and public service, as well as a candid assessment of his or her potential for promotion, based upon the evidence.

30. Policy on 4th Year Appraisals for Research Scientists ORU Consideration The following factors are evaluated when conducting an appraisal: • An appointee’s published research and other completed creative activity and his or her potential for continued research and creative activity. • An appointee’s University and community service contributions. • If an appointee is lacking in either area, the ORU is responsible to provide a plan to resolve this by the next review period.

31. Policy on 4th Year Appraisals for Research Scientists The Possible Appraisal Ratings are: • FAVORABLE: Indicates that promotion is likely, contingent on maintaining the current trajectory of excellence and on appropriate external validation. • FAVORABLE WITH RESERVATIONS: Indicates that promotion is likely, if identified weaknesses or imbalances in the record are corrected. • PROBLEMATIC: Indicates that promotion is possible if substantial deficiencies in the present record are remedied. • UNFAVORABLE: Indicates that substantial deficiencies are present; promotion is unlikely.

32. Policy on 6th Year Readiness Assessmentsfor Project and Research Scientists • A readiness assessment is a department-level evaluation of an appointee’s career achievements and readiness for promotion • If it has not already occurred, a readiness assessment must take place at the time of an appointee’s final merit/reappointment review • The ORU must determine whether an appointee should be recommended for promotion, whether the promotion review should be postponed, or whether the appointee should not be reappointed.

33. Policy on 6th Year Readiness Assessmentsfor Project and Research Scientists • Promotion is Recommended • If the ORU is convinced that an appointee’s record meets or exceeds the University’s expectations for promotion, the department may vote to recommend promotion to the Associate or Full level, effective the following July 1 b. Postponement of Promotion Review • If the ORU believes there is significant work in progress that cannot be completed in time to justify promotion, but which should be completed within the reappointment period (either one or two years) and, when completed, would likely suffice for promotion, the ORU may propose postponement of the promotion review

34. Policy on 6th Year Readiness Assessmentsfor Project and Research Scientists The ORU must demonstrate that the appointee’s academic record is strong, and that s/he is making active and timely progress on substantial work that: • should be completed prior to the promotion review (the anticipated completion date must be indicated); and • would likely suffice for promotion. If the ORU proposes postponement of the promotion review, a reappointment file must be submitted in accordance with the campus deadline for submission of reappointment and merit advancement files

35. Policy on 6th Year Readiness Assessmentsfor Project and Research Scientists • Non-reappointment • If the ORU believes an appointee’s overall career achievements do not justify promotion, and that a postponement of the promotion review is not warranted, no promotion file is prepared and the appointee will not be reappointed. In accordance with APM 137, Non-Senate Appointees/Term Appointment, the appointment will expire on the established ending date. In cases of non-reappointment, the ORU Director should consult with the dean • Campus Review • If the ORU recommends promotion, an academic review file must be prepared for campus review and submitted in accordance with established campus deadlines

36. Policy on 6th Year Readiness Assessmentsfor Project and Research Scientists • If promotion is proposed and denied, or if the ORU does not propose promotion and/or reappointment, in accordance with APM 137, Non-Senate Appointees/Term Appointment, the appointment will expire on the established ending date. • Although notice of non-reappointment is not normally required*, the ORU should provide written notice of non-reappointment whenever possible. *In accordance with APM 137, Non-Senate Appointees/Term Appointment, notice is not required for appointees who have served fewer than eight consecutive years in the same academic title or title series on a campus. If an appointee has served more than eight consecutive years, notice is required as specified in APM 137.

37. Below is a listing of UCSD websites in an effort to help familiarize and inform you on the Academic Personnel process POLICY AND PROCEDURE MANUAL http://adminrecords.ucsd.edu/PPM/Index.html ORU ACADEMIC AFFAIRS WEBSITE: http://research.ucsd.edu/orus/orupers/ UCSD ACADEMIC AFFAIRS WEBSITE: http://academicaffairs.ucsd.edu/offices/apo/

38. Below is a listing of UCSD websites in an effort to help familiarize and inform you on the Academic Personnel process ACADEMIC SENATE COMMITTEE ON ACADEMIC PERSONNEL http://www-senate.ucsd.edu/committees/cap.htm INTERNATIONAL CENTER http://orpheus.ucsd.edu/icenter/scholars/visa_departments.html This page provides Visa information for Departments and International scholars. LEAVES OF ABSENCE ACADEMIC LEAVE POLICY (PPM 230-10) http://adminrecords.ucsd.edu/ppm/docs/230-10.HTML BENEFITS AND PRIVILEGES (APM 700 TO 760) http://www.ucop.edu/acadadv/acadpers/apm/sec5-pdf.html UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT – “AT YOUR SERVICE”SITE http://atyourservice.ucop.edu/employees/life_changes/leaves/index.html SABBATICAL LEAVES http://www.ucop.edu/acadadv/acadpers/apm/apm-740.pdf

39. Questions?