Consistent with School of Medicine expectations, all faculty within the Department of Neurology are reviewed on a scheduled basis (frequency of reviews depends on rank). The annual Career Development Conference Report serves as the written basis for the dialogue associated with these reviews. The department offers detailed guidance for the conduct of these reviews. The review process is designed to create an opportunity for a senior faculty member to offer support, guidance, and assistance with career guidance to junior colleague. It also affords the faculty member being reviewed the opportunity to share with their division director his/her accomplishments, address career goals, and request resources needed to support his/her professional functioning.
Guidance for the Preparation of Annual Career Development Conference Reports
The Annual Career Development Conference Report experience should be a positive and worthwhile one for all concerned parties. The notes below provide some guidance about the overall goals and planning of the meetings needed to prepare these reports.
The Career Development Conference Reports and associated meetings are designed as a mechanism to encourage the success of faculty members. While there is some element of a job performance review associated with these reports and meetings, as the name implies, they really are designed to be career direction/development in focus. Therefore, it is strongly encouraged that the focus of your dialogues be on career direction/development. The meetings should offer the person being reviewed with the opportunity to share his/her accomplishments. It is important that the meetings focus on service, teaching, and scholarship; the balance of these three domains of professional functioning will depend on the area of distinction of the faculty member being reviewed.
It is recommended that the person conducting the meeting offer mentorship and guidance during the meeting. It will be helpful if a concrete list of suggestions (bullet points even) emerges from the meeting. Attention should be paid to helping the faculty member being evaluated to problem-solve various situations that may be complex or challenging. It is important to remind the faculty about all departmental and institutional resources they can benefit from to help their development. Also, make sure to talk about the faculty member’s mentorship needs, and determine if the mentoring program in place is working and sufficient.
Reviewer Process
The person being reviewed must go to the website and sign in using his/her Emory ID and password (as used for other Emory business). The person will then be redirected to a secure Emory server (https) and need to enter his/her login and password again.
The Career Development Conference Report is divided into four parts. There are instructions that will guide you through the completion of the report.
Part I is completed by the faculty member being reviewed. It is comprehensive, yet relatively simple to complete, as it allows one to cut and paste publications and grants from the curriculum vitae directly into the form. It should take approximately 30-60 minutes to complete. It asks for demographic information and time allocation, as well as details about scholarship, teaching, courses attended, service, awards and notable achievements, and goals (previous, current year, long-term). The faculty member being reviewed should discuss Part I with his/her mentor(s) before sending it to the evaluator. Once Part I of the report is finished, click “save Part I” and then click the “send to evaluator” button.
Part II is completed by the reviewer/evaluator. This should be discussed in a face-to-face meeting between the individual responsible for conducting the review and the faculty member being reviewed. These reviews should be conducted in a collegial fashion and designed to provide useful input and feedback to the person being reviewed and his/her mentor(s). In addition, the reviews should offer an opportunity for the faculty member being reviewed to make requests about things that they need to assist them in more effectively carrying out their roles and responsibilities. These meetings should be scheduled for approximately 45 minutes.
Part III should be done after the in-person meeting is held and after Part II is completed. Part III affords the person being reviewed the opportunity to comment on the Part II feedback and make any optional comments that they would like. Once Part III is completed, the person being reviewed must click ‘Faculty’s signature and notify your Chair’ button to complete.
Part IV is completed by the Chair, who may provide additional comments. Afterwards, the file becomes a read-only and can be printed out at any stage. Because it will take Dr. Levey, Chair, some time to review all of these reports, make sure to schedule your interviews and submit your evaluation reports in a timely fashion.
Process for Person Being Reviewed
Please, remember that this process is designed to support you professionally, offer you guidance, and help with your career advancement. It is also an opportunity for you to share with your Division leader what you have accomplished, talk about your goals for the future, and ask for resources that you need to enhance your functioning. The expectation of these reviews is that they be conducted in a collegial fashion, without intimidation. As such, we hope that you will find this to be a valuable experience.
Once you go to the website, you need to sign in using your Emory ID and password that you use for other Emory business. Once you do so, you will be redirected to a secure Emory server (https) and need to enter your login and password again.
The Career Development Conference Report is divided into four parts. There are instructions that will guide you through the completion of the report.
Part I is completed by the faculty member being reviewed. It is comprehensive, yet relatively simple to complete, as it allows one to cut and paste publications and grants from the curriculum vitae directly into the form. It should take approximately 30-60 minutes to complete. It asks for demographic information and time allocation, as well as details about scholarship, teaching, courses attended, service, awards and notable achievements, and goals (previous, current year, long-term). The content of Part I should be discussed with the faculty mentor(s) before sending it to the evaluator. Once Part I of the report is finished, the faculty must click “save Part I” and then click the “send to evaluator” button.
Part II is completed by the reviewer (evaluator). This should be discussed in a face-to-face meeting between the individual responsible for conducting the review and the faculty member being reviewed. These reviews should be conducted in a collegial fashion and designed to provide useful input and feedback to the person being reviewed and his/her mentor(s). In addition, the reviews should offer an opportunity for the faculty member being reviewed to make requests about things that they need to assist them in more effectively carrying out their roles and responsibilities. These meetings should be scheduled for approximately 45 minutes.
Part III should be done after the in-person meeting is held and after Part II is completed. Part III affords the person being reviewed the opportunity to comment on the Part II feedback and make any comments that they would like (optional). Once Part III is completed, you must click ‘Faculty’s signature and notify your Chair’ button to complete.
Part IV is completed by the Chair, who may provide additional comments. Afterwards, the file becomes a read-only and can be printed out at any stage. Because it will take Dr. Levey, Chair, some time to review all of these reports, make sure to schedule your interviews and submit your evaluation reports in a timely fashion.