Clinician Track

Clinical excellence is central to the University of Minnesota’s land-grant mission to improve the lives of all Minnesotans. All three aspects of our purpose—education, clinical practice and research—are critical to the wellbeing and reputation of the Medical School. The clinician track is a unique way to be promoted, prompting a specialized set of processes and procedures for the faculty review.

Dossiers are due annually on September 15.

As part of the promotion process on CT, we are asking for a set of evaluators (14-19) who are familiar with the candidate’s clinical work to evaluate them based on the ACGME list of clinical competencies (referenced in the CT statement).

Expand all

Clinician Track and Departmental Criteria Statements

Resources, Policies, and Procedures

Forms and Templates

There is no need to request access to the documents below. These can all be downloaded under 'File' within each document:
 

Medical School Curriculum Vitae Templates - Required for all Dossiers

Metrics Resources
External Review Resources

Resources:

Guidance regarding external reviewers:

External reviews play a critical part in the review process for promotion. Please consider the following as reviews are solicited:

  • A minimum of four letters (2 arms-length and no more than 2 non-arms length) are to submitted with each promotion dossier. To minimize service expectations for ourselves and our colleagues, please consider how many letters your unit needs to make a reasonable judgment in the review process. In general, including more than seven letters provides little additional value to the process, though there may be circumstances where that is warranted (such as with an interdisciplinary scholar, for example).
  • Include a clear description of the reviewer’s relationship to the candidate.
  • Do not ask external reviewers to compare the candidate to others in the field. Faculty members have different experiences and comparing faculty without knowing of those experiences can lead to an unfair process. Please focus on the individual's accomplishments and contributions to the field as they relate to their track statement.
  • Do not ask reviewers to comment on whether or not the candidate would likely be tenured at their institution, as institutional expectations vary greatly.
  • Do not ask reviewers to comment on teaching unless evidence is provided for them to assess. If teaching evidence is submitted, make sure to include evidence beyond SRTs.
Sample Letters

Expand all

Clinician Track Promotion Committee (CTPC)

  • Oyedele Adeyi, MD, Co-Chair, Professor, Department of Laboratory Medicine & Pathology
  • David Beebe, MD, Professor, Department of Anesthesiology
  • Sarah Benish, MD, FAAN, Associate Professor, Department of Neurology
  • William Browne, MD, Professor, Department of Medicine
  • Stephen Contag, MD, Associate Professor, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Women's Health
  • Amy Esler, PhD, LP, Associate Professor, Department of Pediatrics
  • John Fischer, MD, FACOG, Professor, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Women's Health
  • Caroline George, MD, Associate Professor, Department of Pediatrics 
  • Elie Gertner, MD, Professor, Department of Medicine
  • Robert Gould, MD, Professor, Department of Anesthesiology
  • Hyun Kim, MD, Co-Chair, Associate Professor, Department of Medicine
  • Michael Park, MD, PhD, Associate Professor, Department of Neurosurgery
  • Ramprasad Sripada, MBBS, MMM, Professor, Department of Anesthesiology
  • Steven Stovitz, MD, MS, Professor, Department of Family Medicine and Community Health
  • Joss Thomas, MBBS, MHA, MPH, Professor, Department of Anesthesiology
  • Doug Whiteside, PhD, Co-Chair, Professor, Department of Rehabilitation Medicine
  • Yasuko Yamamura, MD, Associate Professor, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Women's Health
  • Alexandra (Sasha) Zagoloff, PhD, LP, Associate Professor, Department of Psychiatry