{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017321785476349102, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0013324450366422385, 'mean_word_length': 5.155737704918033, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
FACULTY DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION

There have been changes in the manner in which academic institutions appoint and evaluate faculty. The concept of tenure has been radically altered and a higher percentage of faculty are being appointed to positions in which tenure is not attainable. In these circumstances, it is important to provide younger faculty with the opportunity to plan their academic career and to make certain that older faculty do not become non-productive. We have developed a faculty development form that is educational and constructive. It divides each academic function (teaching, research, clinical, administrative, extramural and interpersonal) into seven levels of performance. No level is in itself inappropriate and the profile can be plotted for 10-year intervals, so that changes in the profile are apparent. Each faculty member plans his next year's goals and objectives and the supervisor and the faculty member determine whether the new goals will change the faculty member's profile. We have two years of data on the number of publications, abstracts and research applications during the program compared to previous years. That data indicate that this system stimulates academic growth and we believe it allows some faculty to conclude that academic medicine may not be an appropriate career choice early or even late in their careers. Most importantly, it forces the supervisor and faculty member to establish a written plan for each academic year. (Supported by NIH)