- With the increasing prevalence of collaborative “team science,” it can be challenging for committee reviewers to determine the nature of individual substantive contributions to multi-author works when reviewing a curriculum vitae.
- In order to inform review committees better as they attempt to assess a candidate’s individual scholarly impact, the School of Medicine strongly recommends that certain candidates briefly annotate selected bibliographic entries and include in their Candidate’s Statement summary discussion of individual contributions to collaborative work.
- Those who would benefit from annotation: Any candidate for appointment, reappointment or promotion for whom the majority of scholarly contributions during the last five to seven years are works in which the candidate is neither the first nor the senior author, or whose individual substantive contributions to collaborative efforts may otherwise be difficult to discern from the bibliography.
- Annotation is recommended for peer-reviewed journal articles and/or conference proceedings published during the past five years on which the candidate is the middle author.
- For candidates whose most significant scholarly impact is in areas other than peer-reviewed journal articles or conference proceedings, annotation is recommended for works in the area(s) of high impact in which the candidate’s individual contributions are not apparent from review of the CV.
Guidelines for Preparation of Bibliography and Candidate’s Statement Materials for Faculty Candidates Whose Scholarly Contributions are Primarily Collaborative in Nature