The Advance CV WorkgroupThe Advance CV Workgroup

October 20, 2014

2

• Welcome• The Advance CV• Workgroup Overview• The redesign process• Section by Section Analysis

Agenda

3

Welcome• Why you?

– You have expertise that will help us redevelop the Advance CV for use as an Academic Review tool and as a general-purpose CV for faculty• Reviewer• CV User

– Please try to attend all meetings

4

Workgroup MembersName Affiliation

Brian Alldredge Academic Affairs*

Ann Bolger Medicine

Shari Dworkin Social & Behavioral Sciences*

Mitch Feldman Medicine

Paul Garcia Neurology*

Ned Hamilton IT Academic Admin Systems*

Peter Hunt Medicine

Tom Kearney Clinical Pharmacy*

Cynthia Lynch Leathers Academic Affairs*

Jacqueline Leung Anesthesiology

Jeffrey Lotz Orthopaedic Surgery

Carol Miller Academic Affairs*

Peter Sargent Cell & Tissue Biology*

Kanade Shinkai Dermatology

Freddie Tai IT Academic Admin Systems

* Steering Committee for Academic Information Systems Initiatives (SCAAISI) member

5

Workgroup Charge• Develop an updated CV format that allows

faculty greater flexibility to represent the full range of their academic accomplishments

• Provide feedback and guidance on functionality for uploading/editing the CV

• Determine and maintain a standard CV format to provide efficiency for faculty reviewers

• Represent your constituencies during the revision process

• Advocate for the CV Module we develop

6

The Advance CV• History

– Developed in 2009– Based on the 2005 UCSF CV Guidelines

• Created by CAP to facilitate academic review

– Solicited CVs from ALL faculty and imported CVs from most faculty who submitted one

7

The Advance CV• Features

– Import text from a Word document• Entire CV or section by section

– Import publications from UCSF Profiles/PubMed– Rich Text in pubs and summary fields– Export to Word document– ID items to include in NIH Biosketch

8

The Advance CV• Why make changes?

– User feedback• Make it more flexible for other purposes• As is, I have to keep a Word version of the CV too• I want to add a section to the CV• I want to segment my publications by specialty

• Why now?– Stable format for three review cycles– Nearly all faculty have used the CV for the

Academic Review process– We’ve received funding to make improvements

9

Workgroup Overview• What we hope to accomplish

– Re-design the CV used for academic review– Design a CV that can be used for more than just

the academic review process– Decide what works for UCSF faculty

• Reviewers• CV Users

• What I will ask of you– It’s your CV; what do you need/want?– Step outside of your expertise to accommodate

other views and think about the user experience

10

Workgroup Overview• Meeting Structure

– The Advance CV Overview– Section by Section review, ideas, and comments

• This process will take several meetings

– Develop examples of new ideas• Mock ups of ideas discussed here may be presented at

each meeting• Feedback, comments, and additional input about the

mockups will be used in the design process

11

The CV Redesign ProcessSection by Section analysis

– The content perspective• Does the structure of this section allow the user to tell

their story?– Ideas: sub-sections, new sections, etc.

– The functionality perspective• Is this section easy to use, modify, export?

– Ideas: sort options, moving things around, filters, etc.

• Is it easy to create a CV for different purposes?

– The academic review perspective• Can a reviewer easily find what’s needed to evaluate

academic accomplishments?– Ideas: Required vs Optional sections; “Do you need this?” “Does

this help you evaluate the academic accomplishments?”

12

Section by Section AnalysisDEMO

13

The Advance CV• Other topics that need to be discussed:

– Rich Text fields• Rich Text enables bold, underline, italics, formatting

tricks like bullets, indents, hanging indents, etc.• Opens “paste” process to introduce unwanted code• Can we “strip” rich text when pasting, forcing the user

to add formatting using the rich text tool?

– Sharing your data• Default is NOT to share data – user can enable sharing• Do we want system-defined access to some data?

– “Granularity” of fields• Original design considered sorting and reporting• Do we need more granularity?