OFFICE OF RESEARCH AFFAIRS 9500 GILMAN DRIVE
TEL: (858) 534-9758 LA JOLLA, CALIFORNIA 92093-0043
FAX: (858) 534-3868 http://research.ucsd.edu
SUBJECT: ACADEMIC REVIEW CALL LETTER – actions effective JULY 1, 2015 - For All Actions including Merits/Reappointments, Promotions/Career Reviews, and Appraisals
If you are receiving this information, you are eligible for academic advancement review, effective July 1, 2015.
Because Organized Research Units (ORU’s) collectively have a large number of reviews to process, and because the final deadlines for submission of review files are strictly enforced by the Vice Chancellor, your materials must be returned and received by me, the ORU Academic Personnel Analyst (ORU/APA), no later than the deadline in the attached email.
è This document contains a detailed description of the items needed for the preparation of your review file.
èSubmit Your File Documents using the ORU Drop Box: Your completed materials and individual documents (as listed below) are to be downloaded back to me, the Organized Research Unit, Academic Personnel Analyst (ORU/APA), on or before the deadline in the attached email by using this link: https://ratpcsws.ucsd.edu/dropbox.
Please be sure to name each document specifically with your LAST NAME first, then the doc type as follows:
JONES_BioBibl
JONES_Research Statement
Etc…
ACADEMIC REVIEW DOCUMENTS CHECKLIST
Review period: Update your documentation from your last review through June 30, 2014 (Please Note: Since we prepare review files 1 year in advance, your Review documents will cover your activity up to and including June 30, 2014, and the action will be effective June 30, 2015.)
The following is a checklist of the review materials you need to submit - Once completed; submit all documents electronically to ORU Academic File Drop Box link indicated above):
1) UCSD Bio-Bibliography Form – DATES MUST BE INCLUDED FOR ALL ENTRIES AND LISTED FROM OLDEST TO NEWEST - The final version of this form from your last review, if it was available, (attached to this email) to provide you with a starting point. Please do not remove any historical information from the last review cycle as this document is meant to be comprehensive and cumulative. Please just add on anything new since your last review, leaving all prior documentation intact.
Bibliography. (attached to this email) Your bibliography is included in your biography in section III - please refer to this and update only publications that are new since your last review. Do not remove or renumber any of the previously listed citations. See additional guidelines below for instructions on how to list these items. There has been a new section added this year (B.IV) where Patents and other special works are to be listed (please describe significance of these items in your Research Statement). You will also need to inform us of the disposition of any publications that were previously “In Press” or were previously listed in Section C, Work in Progress, at your last review.
NOTE: Please also upload it additionally to me as a word.doc as I will make edits and format changes as needed, and return it to you at a later time for your final approval and signature.
2) Certification A (attached to this email) – need signature - processed at the time documents are initially submitted for review
3) Research Statement – Use the TEMPLATE/Guideline (attached to this email). One of the most important items is the written statement regarding your research and service. Please follow the TEMPLATE provided.
4) Updated Curriculum Vitae - provide a copy of your updated CV in the standard format, electronically, as this may provide an additional synopsis of your career and/or list some additional items not found in the UCSD file material. Your CV will also be used when requesting referee letters, as applicable. Do not include narratives, personal information, personal addresses or referees names in your CV
5) Reprints and preprints –Submit PDFs of all NEW Section A & Section C (as applicable) publications added since your last review
6) List of Qualified “Candidate-Selected” Referees - If you will be pursuing a Promotion, advancement to Full Project Scientist/Research Scientist, Step VI, or Project Scientist/Research Scientist, Above-Scale, there will also be a Career Review conducted on your file and this will additionally require the submission of Referee names from both you and your Department. Please submit names of your “candidate” external referees as requested if this is your case.
For your convenience, Additional Details for Preparation of Materials needed for all Merit Advancements and Promotions/Career Reviews are provided below:
1) Updated UCSD Biography Form (attached to this email, if available): DATES MUST BE INCLUDED FOR ALL ENTRIES AND LISTED FROM OLDEST TO NEWEST - This form is required to be completed at the time of academic review. This document is in MS Word format. NO PRIOR INFORMATION SHOULD BE DELETED - EXCEPT FOR IN THE GRANTS SECTION. No re-numbering of the Bibliography is allowed. All citations should be listed in date order from Oldest to Newest.
Section I. Please complete, and/or update any changes.
Section II. This section is required to be completed at each review.
Section II (c). All honors and awards you have achieved since taking an academic position (at any institution) should be listed, not just the awards over the past review period. Be sure to include the year of each reward.
Section II, (d). Please work with your fund manager to complete this section on all NEW contracts and grants. Files have been returned due to false information, so please be sure to provide accurate information. Only grants that were/are active during the current review period should be listed. Please be sure to indicate your role and %, as well as that of PI/Co-PIs.
Section III. This is your bibliography, which comprises three sections. I will format and edit your biobib to APO standards, after you have provided your current information/updates.
2) Updated UCSD Bibliography Form (attached to this email, if available): List items in your bibliography by section with Section A first, etc., and order them chronologically (oldest to newest). You must include after each item the type of publication and its status. Below is a list of those publication types and status to be used so that we may maintain consistency. DO NOT DELETE ANT PREVIOUSLY LISTED CITATIONS
Section A includes only peer-reviewed publications. This includes research articles, peer-reviewed invited reviews, or books/book chapters as part of the prepublication process. This section should not include abstracts of papers or conference proceedings unless the department can provide documentation that the work has equivalent stature or is referred to a standard equivalent to that for professional journals. Articles in this section should be published. In press or accepted (with documentation) may also be put in this section.
Section B includes non-refereed meeting/conference proceedings, and abstracts (see below), etc. Section B also includes non-peer-reviewed and other publications, patents, and other scholarly material, which is described as “scholarly activities such as patents, presentations, performed material, non-reviewed works, conference proceedings, abstracts, etc. as well as unpublished work.” In press or accepted (with documentation) may also be put in this section. The ORU Director must justify the inclusion of abstracts in Section A, as they detract from the rest of the file.
èThere has been a new section added this year (B.IV) where Patents and other special works are to be listed (please describe significance any of these listed items in your Research Statement).
Section C includes Work In Progress. (This section is used ONLY when being reviewed for Appraisal assessments). All items listed in Section C (Work in Progress) MUST be accompanied by a PDF draft. NOTE: “Submitted” items must include the confirmation email from the publisher.
Summary:
SECTION ARTICLE TYPE STATUS
Section A Research Article Published
Peer Reviewed Book In Press
Peer Reviewed Book Chapter Accepted (must have documentation from publisher)
Peer Reviewed Review Article
Peer Reviewed Abstract
Peer Reviewed Conference Proceeding (Engineering)
Invited Article
Patents (Engineering)
Section B New Section B.IV as described
Abstract Published
Non-Refereed Conf Proc’s In Press
Peer Reviewed Conf Proc’s (non-Engineering)
Accepted (must have documentation from publisher)
Reviews
Patent
Monograph
Encyclopedia Entry
Thesis
Report
Popular Article
Software
Editor
Editorial
Commentary
Section C Section A types only In Preparation
(Used for Submitted (must have documentation from publisher)
appraisals In Revision
Abandoned
If work has been since published, provide the relevant data. For those works in Section C that will remain in that section, provide a status update even if the status is the same.
IMPORTANT REMINDERS
èYou are encouraged to take a responsible and active role in the preparation of your academic review file documents by providing the relevant materials in a timely fashion, and by discussing with your Mentor and Director any concerns you may have that pertain to your pending review file.
è It is critical that you meet file document submission deadline in the attached email, so that your Director will have sufficient time to act upon your review proposal and also meet the mandatory Research Affairs deadlines, or we will not be able to guarantee your review or advancement for an effective date of July 1, 2015.
èAcademics eligible for Promotions, Career Reviews, Appraisals, and Above Scale actions will be able to add/include reprints/preprints ONLY up until October 15th, but no other materials, and ONLY if needed to support the file ONLY in MARGINAL cases.
Overview – UCSD Academic File Review Process
èPolicy Links Regarding Appointments and Advancements
http://adminrecords.ucsd.edu/ppm/docs/230-20.pdf (Appointments Policy PPM 230-20)
http://adminrecords.ucsd.edu/ppm/docs/230-28.pdf (Advancements & Reappointments PPM 230-28)
The Professional Research (Research Scientist) Series
The performance criteria for the Professional Research (Research Scientist) series (hereafter referred to as the Research Scientist series) are the same as for the Professor (Ladder-Rank) series in the area of research and creative activity.
The appointee must be continuously and effectively engaged in independent research and creative activity of
high quality and significance, equivalent to that expected of the Professor series.
Associate and Full Research Scientists are expected to engage in University and/or Professional service, such as service on research review boards.
Assistant Research Scientists are recommended to participate in service activities and should document activities in the UCSD Bio-Bibl Form.
Appointees in the Research Scientist series at UCSD) function as independent investigators, have complete responsibility for their research programs, and are leaders or have the potential for leadership in their fields. The ability to sustain an independent research program is a necessary but not sufficient criterion for appointment as a Research Scientist.
Research Scientists normally are fully self-funded Principal Investigators. Occasionally, Research Scientist appointments will be given to candidates who meet the criteria for research quality and independence, but who are not Principal Investigators. Typically these individuals will be funded by large center or program project grants that support many independent investigators.
Assistant Research Scientists also may be funded as Co-Principal Investigators on grants. They should demonstrate strong potential to become independent and distinguished researchers and should work independently on grants.
The Project Scientist Series
Criteria for advancement and reappointment in this series are demonstrated significant, original contributions to a research project or creative program. Appointees in this series need not demonstrate the same leadership ability, independence, or scholarly breadth as members of the Research Scientist or Professor Series. University and public service are recommended.
At the time of academic review, the Project Scientist’s supervisor (normally the principal investigator) should evaluate the Project Scientist and submit his or her written evaluation and recommendation to the department Director.
Project Scientists may serve as Principal Investigators only with PI Exception, but may serve as Co-Principal Investigators with members of the Professor or Research Scientist series.
An appointee in this series who carries a significant teaching load must concurrently hold an appropriate instructional title, following campus review procedures for such appointments.
For Project Scientists who demonstrate strong potential for independent research, the Vice Chancellor for Research Affairs will consider requests from department chairs for exceptions to the Principal Investigator eligibility policy. The award of Principal Investigator status does not in itself justify a change in series to the Research Scientist series.
UCSD File Review Process – A Brief Overview
Every UCSD Academic member undergoes a periodic formal review by the ORU and campus reviewers at various intervals depending upon their appointed series, rank and step. Files are reviewed every two years until the academic is promoted to Full Project Scientist/Research Scientist, and then every three years until he/she is advanced to Full Project Scientist/Research Scientist, Step IX, or above. The file is then reviewed every four years.
TYPES OF ACTIONS
1. Merit/Reappointment Reviews
Focus only on progress made during the last review period. However, all information in the UCSD BioBibliography Form should always remain comprehensive – i.e., listed from oldest to newest, no previously reported/reviewed activity should be deleted from the form, except for that listed in the Grants Section.
- Promotions
These actions require external evaluators (referees names are provided by both the candidate and the Department) to assess the quality of the academic’s progress. These letters provided by external referees help the Unit division and the campus assess each individual’s qualifications for the proposed rank/step when being considered for Promotion to Associate Project Scientist/Research Scientist, or to Full Project Scientist/Research Scientist, and advancement to and through Full Project Scientist/Research Scientist Step VI, and advancement to Project Scientist/Research Scientist Above Scale (which follows Project Scientist/Research Scientist Step IX). These actions are considered as comprehensive Career Reviews, and therefore file materials considered includes everything since the last career review/promotion
3. Accelerated Merits/Promotions
Requests due to exemplary performance can be processed at the normal review date and will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. Acceleration occurs when an individual receives a merit advancement or promotion after serving fewer years at a given step than is normal for that step. It also occurs when, through advancement, an entire step is skipped.