2.5.I. Application of the Criteria
Unlike faculty in the University Tenure Line whose research is conducted in a broadly defined field, faculty appointed in the Research Line generally have special expertise in a relatively narrow field that is of particular benefit to a broader clinical or research program. Typically, such special expertise expands the academic impact of strong clinical or other research programs ongoing in the School of Medicine. Most of the faculty in the Research Line are recruited to be part of a program with a multidisciplinary need.
Investigative independence (or, for assistant professors, the promise of investigative independence) is expected since it can be a useful marker of substantive scholarly contributions. The main emphasis of written contributions should be on peer-reviewed articles. Other written work such as books, chapters, reviews and commentaries may be considered as long as their impact in advancing clinical medicine or basic science can be established. With respect to multi-author works, it is expected that contributions (especially by associate professors and professors) will be made through senior authorship or through other substantive contributions.
In addition, the quality of scholarship will generally be reflected in peer-reviewed grants and contracts, which are an important indicator of success in the field, as well as being the source of funding that is a prerequisite for appointment in the Research Line.
Factors considered in assessing research performance may include (but are not limited to) the following: scholarly activity and productivity; impact, innovation and creativity; recognition in the field; ability to work effectively as part of a research team (if relevant); effective communication with colleagues, staff and students; and professionalism, institutional compliance and ethics.
2. Other Considerations
Since positions in this faculty line are specifically designated for research, there is no formal teaching obligation. However, such faculty often teach actively in their research laboratories, and they may also teach departmental courses. In these cases, there must be acceptable performance (or, in the case of Assistant Professors, the promise of acceptable performance) in any teaching role appropriate to the programmatic need the individual is expected to fulfill.
b) Clinical Care
The School of Medicine generally discourages significant clinical time commitments for Research Line faculty. However, in cases where there is such activity, the performance must be excellent.
c) Institutional Service
Faculty members in the Research Line are primarily assessed for reappointment and promotion on the basis of their achievements in the area of scholarship, as noted above. Service (including what might be called institutional citizenship) may also be given some consideration. Since a major commitment to administrative activities detracts from the time available for scholarship, Assistant Professors are discouraged from significant administrative activities and departments are discouraged from requiring such.
d) Respectful Workplace
The School of Medicine is committed to providing a work environment that is conducive to teaching and learning, research, the practice of medicine and patient care. Stanford’s special purposes in this regard depend on a shared commitment among all members of the community to respect each person’s worth and dignity. Because of their roles within the School of Medicine, faculty members, in particular, are expected to treat all members of the Stanford Community with civility, respect and courtesy and with an awareness of the potential impact of their behavior on staff, students and other faculty members.
As detailed above in this section, application of criteria for evaluating the quality of scholarship include specific expectations regarding a faculty member’s professional behavior in the workplace. They are reiterated here to emphasize their importance as factors in appointment, reappointment and promotion actions.
In scholarly activities, such factors relevant to whether the standards for scholarship have been met may include: the ability to work effectively as part of a research team; effective communication with colleagues, staff and students; and professionalism, institutional compliance and ethics
For Research Line faculty who are engaged in teaching activities, such factors relevant to whether the standards for teaching have been met may include: a positive style of interaction with students; availability; professionalism; institutional compliance and ethics; effective communication skills; helpfulness in learning; and ability to work effectively as part of the teaching team.
The School of Medicine generally discourages significant clinical time commitments for faculty in this line. However, for Research Line faculty who are engaged in clinical care activities, such factors relevant to evaluation of whether the standards for clinical performance have been met may include: professionalism, institutional compliance and ethics; humanism; ability to work effectively as part of the health care team; and effective communication with colleagues, staff, students and patients.