Faculty Promotion Research Articles

Invited African-American Radiation Oncology Grand Rounds Speakers: DEI or Die?

Invitations for grand rounds/visiting professor speakership are a sign of national expertise and are used to evaluate faculty promotion and advancement in Radiation Oncology. Consequently, evaluation of the demographics of faculty receiving such invitations may play a role in elucidating barriers to career advancement. We performed this study to assess the demographic racial and gender representation of invited Radiation Oncology speakerships, as well as the proportion of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI)-related talks among invited African-American radiation oncology speakers. Radiation oncology programs in the United States were contacted by telephone and e-mail to obtain a list of speakers (grand rounds speakers and/or visiting professor) invited to their institution along with their speaking topics presented between January 2021 and December 2022. Speakers were categorized demographically by race and gender; speaker demographics were determined by a previously validated combination of facial recognition and internet investigation (PubMed.gov identification numbers 30996695 and 34919411). Speakers who were not faculty (i.e., residents, medical students) were eliminated from analysis. Talk topics were categorized as either DEI or non-DEI talks from the presence/absence of DEI-related content in the speaker's talk title. The Fisher's exact test was used for statistical analysis, with significance set at p < 0.05. A total of 252 invited speakers and their associated talk topics were obtained from 51 radiation oncology programs. Of these speakers, 98 were female (38.9%) and 16 were African-American race (6.3%). The invited talk topic was DEI-related in 7% of total cases. Among speakers not of African-American race, this was 4.2% (10/236); among African-American speakers, it was 50% (8/16). This difference reached statistical significance (p<0.0001). A significant proportion of invited African-American radiation oncology grand rounds/visiting professor talks are focused on the topic of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), compared with less than 5% of non-African-American invited speakers. Targeted efforts to expand African-American representation in non-DEI topics are needed to ensure and expand diversity in Radiation Oncology.

Disparities in Promotion and Retention Rates Among Underrepresented in Medicine Faculty in U.S. Ophthalmology Departments

PurposeThis study examines the rates and trends of faculty promotions within the field of ophthalmology, with comparative emphasis on the rates of promotion among URiM faculty. DesignA retrospective panel study was conducted using the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) Faculty Roster database. MethodsWe utilized the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) Faculty Roster data to assess trends in academic faculty promotions within U.S. ophthalmology departments. Full-time assistant and associate professors appointed between 2000-2010 were included in the analysis, and tracked until November 2021 to determine promotion rates. Pearson's Chi-squared and Fisher's exact tests were utilized to evaluate differences in promotion and retention rates based on gender, race and ethnicity, advanced degree, and tenure status. ResultsThe demographics of 1436 assistant, and 680 associate faculty members were obtained for analysis through the AAMC. Black faculty had lower promotion rates when compared to White faculty (20% vs 37% p<.001). Faculty with MD/PhD degrees demonstrated higher promotion rates than faculty with MD degrees alone (59% vs 36%, p<.001). Additionally, Faculty not on tenure track had lower rates of promotion than those on tenure track (35% vs 48%, p<.001). With respect to faculty retention: among assistant and associate professors combined, Black faculty and faculty without tenure track appointments were more likely to leave academic medicine (46% vs 33%, p<.001) and (36% vs 27%, p<.001) respectively. ConclusionIn this study, promotion rates varied significantly by race/ethnicity. Specifically, Black faculty had lower rates of promotion and retention in academic medicine. These findings underscore the need to explore and implement strategies and policies to address equity in promotion rates and retention of URiM faculty within academic ophthalmology.

What Happens after Tenure? Exploring Stimuli of Promotion to Full Professor in Top-Ranking Criminology and Criminal Justice Programs in the United States

This research addressed how research productivity and scholarly influence may contribute to associate professors’ promotion to the full professor rank. In 2017, we collected vitae of tenure-track faculty employed at top Ph.D.-granting criminology and criminal justice programs in the U.S.A. In this paper, we used the data for 213 associate and full professors and employed survival analysis to examine their time to promotion and factors that stimulated the process. Results showed that the number of sole-authored articles and citation counts positively predicted faculty’s likelihood of being promoted to full professors. We also found faculty members who graduated after 1996 were promoted approximately twice as fast as those who graduated before the year; however, neither race nor gender influenced faculty promotion trajectories. Finally, limitations and implications were discussed.

Analysis of Gender and Race in Pharmacy Faculty and Administrators

ObjectiveThe objective of this report is to identify and characterize the relative likelihood of women and racially minoritized pharmacy faculty being promoted, advancing within leadership roles, and earning comparable salaries. MethodsData from the 2010–2021 American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy Profile of Pharmacy Faculty surveys were analyzed to compare odds ratios for promotion, leadership roles, and salary gaps of pharmacy faculty according to race and gender. Changes in the odds ratios over time were characterized by linear regression and predictions about when and if equality would be achieved according to current trends were calculated. ResultsCompared to White male counterparts, faculty identifying as women, Black, Hispanic, or Asian had a significantly lower odds ratio of promotion to associate or full professor. Women and Asian faculty also had a lower likelihood of promotion from assistant to associate or Chief Executive Officer (CEO) dean. No demographics studied were more likely than White men to advance in rank or attain associate or CEO dean leadership positions. Furthermore, negative salary gaps for women emerge after promotion from assistant professor, becoming significant and continuing to widen at the associate (−$20,419) and CEO dean (−$37,495) level. ConclusionDespite attention to matters of diversity, equity, and inclusion, female and racially minoritized faculty continue to experience lower rates of promotion, leadership advancement, and wages compared to White male colleagues. These results have negative consequences for recruiting and retaining talented faculty and students, and compromise the benefits that a diverse faculty is known to provide on student learning outcomes.

Scholarship Criteria for Promotion in the Age of Diverse Faculty Roles and Digital Media.

In academic medical centers, scholarship is essential to advancing scientific knowledge, clinical care, and teaching and is a requirement for faculty promotion. Traditional evidence of scholarship, such as publications in peer-reviewed academic journals, remains applicable to the promotions of physician and nonphysician researchers. Often, however, the same evidence does not fit the scholarly work and output of clinician-educators, whose scholarship is often disseminated through digital communications and social media. This difference challenges promotion and tenure committees to evaluate the scholarship of all faculty fairly and consistently. This study aimed to generate a list of the features that a faculty product should demonstrate to be considered scholarship, regardless of how it is disseminated. The full professors of one academic department of family medicine engaged in a mini-Delphi deliberative process to identify criteria to assess whether a scholarly product put forth by faculty in the promotion process is indeed scholarship. The full professors identified seven criteria to evaluate a faculty product to assess whether it represents scholarship-specifically its demonstration of faculty expertise, faculty contribution, originality, peer review, quality, relative permanence, and impact. These criteria may help promotion committees more easily and consistently assess the full scope of a faculty member's scholarly work within today's changing approaches to its dissemination.

The Unintended Consequences of Quantitative-Centralized Faculty Promotion

The Unintended Consequences of Quantitative-Centralized Faculty Promotion

Reimagining tenure and promotion for creative faculty: the Creative Scholarship Pathways Framework

ABSTRACT Faculty members interested in creating creative scholarship face advancement obstacles due to few known tenure and promotion standards. This study involved qualitative semistructured interviews with U.S. communication and media creative faculty members producing scholarship spanning multiple mediums. Interviewed scholars primarily expressed their scholarship's contributions involved local community engagement. Yet creative scholars perceived departmental leadership preferred to rely on artistic and professional standards to evaluate the quality of their work rather than engaged criteria. Participants felt such criteria too narrowly constrained them and delegitimized the value of their work. The results provide evidence that creative scholars struggle when communicating their work's value and documenting their scholarship achievements. Guidance is provided through the formalization of a Creative Scholarship Pathways Framework conceptually made up of four evaluation concepts rooted in the engaged and creative scholarship literature: (1) collaboration, (2) outreach, (3) peer review, and (4) innovation.

Beyond fraudulent multiculturalism in higher education: moving forward

Abstract Recent demographic changes in the United States have shown that we live in a multicultural society. However, for some reason, colleges and universities are still floundering in mediocrity when it comes to multiculturalism. What we see in higher education is multiculturalism that is fraudulent and unaccountable and the fact that individuals from culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) and vulnerable backgrounds consistently endure White supremacy, racism, discrimination, and xenophobia, to say the least. In addition, we consistently see that proactive and measurable efforts are not made in the recruitment, retention, graduation, continuation, tenure, and promotion of students, faculty, staff, and leaders from CLD, immigrant, and vulnerable backgrounds. While there are well-written and documented policies, mission and vision statements, and goals and objectives in institutions of higher learning, there appears to be deficits in applicability and accountability measures of equity, diversity, quality, goodness, and fairness. Most strategies seem to be feel-good, look-good, fake, bandaid, and fraudulent approaches that are divorced from realities. How do we reverse these moves while respecting the traditional roles of higher education? This article responds to this critical question.

대학자치와 인사행정상의 부패방지방안

The Constitution recognizes university autonomy to practically guarantee academic freedom. University autonomy means that universities autonomously decide and execute university issues without external influence and take responsibility for the results.&#x0D; National and public universities and private universities, within the scope of not violating the Constitution, the Higher Education Act, the Education Public Officials Act, the Disciplinary Order for Education Officials, and the Private School Act, the University Faculty Personnel Regulations, University Faculty Disciplinary Regulations, University Faculty Promotion Regulations, University Faculty Reappointment Regulations, The Articles of Incorporation, etc. are regulated autonomously, and new recruitment, reappointment, promotion, dismissal, and disciplinary actions are reviewed by the University Personnel Committee, the Faculty Personnel Committee, and the Faculty Disciplinary Committee in accordance with the faculty personnel related regulations. Personnel authority and disciplinary authority have been conducting personnel administration at their discretion. In particular, university personnel administration is understood as a lawful disposition, not judged as a deviation or abuse of discretion, unless it significantly loses its validity from a socially accepted point of view.&#x0D; Despite the fact that fairness, objectivity, and integrity are more required in the faculty personnel department, the sacred university that seeks truth demands money and valuables while hiring new teachers, solicits or arranges professor appointments, or delays, academic ties, or Personnel corruption is constantly occurring due to collusion in hiring relationships due to blood ties, abuse of power, bribery, embezzlement, intentional deception, fraud, and non-compliance with personnel regulations.&#x0D; In the case where the Ministry of Education has conducted a comprehensive audit when personnel corruption at a specific university has become a social problem, most of them are given a 'Warning' or 'Caution' despite the fact that the personnel corruption was revealed. In addition, even though the sentencing for personnel corruption by teachers is a matter of severe punishment, they are disposing of light punishment without objective reasons for mitigating.&#x0D; Therefore, after examining the concept, legal nature, content and limitations of university autonomy, the direction for preventing corruption in university personnel administration is presented. In particular, from the viewpoint of ensuring university autonomy under the Constitution, the direction of enactment of the Anti-Corruption Act on personnel administration of university faculty, rationalization of the Conflict of Interest Prevention Act, strengthening of university self-audit functions, establishment of good governance in personnel administration, rationalization of anti-corruption policies, and mandatory education on integrity and ethics, and discusses the mandatory use of the personnel management system.

Teaching has changed … but have the students?

Teaching has changed … but have the students?

Gender Disparities in Physician Assistant Educator Promotion and Compensation: A Mixed Methods Approach.

The gender wage gap is well documented in many industries. A disparity in salary between female and male physician assistant (PA) educators has been demonstrated, but disparities in academic rank have not been shown. The purpose of this study was to re-examine gender disparities in compensation to PA educators and to explore whether gender-based disparities exist in promotion to higher academic rank in this field. An explanatory sequential mixed-methods design was used to determine differences in salary and rank by gender. PA Education Association Faculty and Directors Survey data from 2014, 2017, and 2019 were analyzed. A focus group was conducted to explain the findings and understand the barriers to promotion for female faculty. Female PA faculty members earn $7573 less than their male colleagues when controlling for all other variables. Female faculty members have an increased likelihood (RR 1.150) for being in early career stage versus late career stage. Obtaining a doctoral degree decreased the risk for being in an early career stage (RR 0.567) with men twice as likely to have a doctoral degree as women. Rank and salary disparities exist in PA faculty by gender. Female faculty are less likely to hold doctoral degrees or to be promoted to higher academic ranks, and they earn less than men. Degree level and career track are themes unique to the PA education profession, and further research is needed to understand their impact. With more women entering PA education, pay equity and promotion need to be addressed.

Editorial

This special issue of the Journal of Chemometrics is devoted to Dr. Steven D. Brown, who retired in 2021. Steve is one of the original leaders of the chemometrics revolution and one of the three founding editors of the Journal of Chemometrics. Steve has also served as one of the three editors in chief of the four-volume series, Comprehensive Chemometrics, published by Elsevier. Steve is the first recipient of the Eastern Analytical Symposium Award in Chemometrics. Steve has also taught the short course on chemometrics at National American Chemical Society meetings for 15 years and has been a member of the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry Working Group on Chemometrics since 1987 and the Chemometrics in Analytical Chemistry Program Committee since 1992. Steve has been an active participant at many historic chemometrics conferences, for example, the North American Treaty Organization Advanced Studies Institute on Chemometrics (Cosenza, Italy 1983), Snowbird Conference on Computer-Enhanced Analytical Spectrometry (1994), and International Chemometrics InterNet Conference Computer Network Conference on Chemometrics (1994). Steve has also served as an external referee on promotion and tenure committees for faculty in chemometrics (e.g., Paul Gemperline, Karl Booksh, Sarah Rutan, Barry Lavine, Paul Crilly, William Rayens, Sharon Neal, Peter Wentzel, Peter Harrington, Piet Van Espen, Paul Geladi, Frank Vogt, Rasmus Bro, and Jan Baumbach). Steven Brown obtained his PhD in analytical chemistry from the University of Washington in 1978, working in the laboratory of Bruce Kowalski. The title of his doctoral dissertation was “Computer-Controlled Electrochemistry and Pattern Recognition.” In 1978, Steve joined the faculty of the University of California at Berkeley as an assistant professor and as a principal investigator at the Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory. He moved to Washington State University in 1981 where he was awarded tenure and promoted to associate professor. In 1986, Steve joined the Department of Chemistry at the University of Delaware, advancing through the ranks to become a professor, chairman of the Department of Chemistry, and Willis F. Harrington Professor. Over the course of his career, Steve has published over 120 research papers and 22 book chapters and has presented 300 talks at seminars and professional meetings. Steve is best known for his work in Kalman filtering for peak deconvolution, calibration transfer between spectrometers without the need of standards, feedforward and Bayes neural networks for multivariate calibration and classification, wavelets, and more recently, imputation methods and stacked methods for classification and calibration of spectral data. Steve's work highlights the changes that have occurred in the field of chemometrics since its inception in the mid-1970s. Steven Brown is also regarded as an outstanding teacher. Many students who have taken Steve's courses over the years have commented that he explains the material well and his lectures are always thoughtful and well organized. As a thesis and dissertation advisor (31 master's and doctorate students), Steve is regarded as thorough, logical, and clear in his recommendations to guide students in their research. He is always available when needed to address questions and is a good critical reviewer of a student's work. On a personal level, Steve is thoughtful and soft spoken both with his undergraduates and with his graduate students—a true gentleman and scholar. Steve's sense of humor is disarming. From a professional standpoint, Steven Brown and Edmund Malinowski are similar in their accomplishments and their professional relations toward others, and it is appropriate that Steven Brown shares this special issue of the Journal of Chemometrics with Edmund Malinowski. Both pioneers possessed a wealth of knowledge and experience, and their retirement (Steve Brown) or death (Edmund Malinowski) signifies the end of an era for the community. The peer review history for this article is available at https://publons.com/publon/10.1002/cem.3470. No data is available.

An innovative approach to career development and promotion of diverse faculty.

Women and persons from racial and ethnic populations underrepresented in medicine (URiM) comprise a substantially lower proportion of academic internal medicine faculty, particularly at senior ranks (associate professors and professors). Numerous factors lead to this inequity which has broad implications for medical education and healthcare. The Emory University Division of General Internal Medicine Grady Section (GIMG) formed the Faculty Review Committee (FRC) in 2013 to address low promotion rates to senior ranks as part of a strategy to foster a more inclusive, equitable environment. The FRC systematically and proactively reviews all GIMG faculty years prior to possible promotion to provide tailored recommendations to bolster professional development and with a goal to expedite successful advancement to senior ranks. Deidentified GIMG academic rank data was compared with aggregate data from Emory University School of Medicine and the American Association of Medical Colleges. In 2020, GIMG had significantly more senior faculty compared with pre-FRC intervention (odds ratio [OR]: 3.94, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.65-9.42). Subgroup analyses of non-URiM women GIMG senior faculty compared with preintervention (OR: 11.6, 95% CI: 2.52-53.7), showed a significant increase. A trend towardincreased URiM women faculty was also seen. Descriptive analysis suggests that the GIMG group had a higher promotion to senior ranks among women and URiM compared with national and institutional comparators. The FRC is associated with significant increases in the promotion of all faculty and non-URiM women faculty, and an increasing trend of URiM women faculty, effects which help contribute to an equitable academic medicine environment, fostering a more diverse workforce and improved patient outcomes.

Reforming the Culture of Medical Faculty Promotion and Appointment

A fairly recent paper published in the Annals of the National Academy of Medical Sciences attempted to provide improved and refined suggestions, based on a survey with a limited number of respondents (n = 182), on how to improve the faculty promotion criteria as suggested by the Medical Council of India (MCI).[1] The objectives of that paper were noble, providing a finer-scale “reward” scale for different manuscript types, and attempting to provide greater equity to additional authors, thereby giving them a fairer chance of more equal promotion opportunities. This letter encourages reflection on additional issues that the erstwhile MCI and Indian medical practitioners could consider to better or additionally assess faculty promotion.

A 5-Year Update and Comparison of Factors Related to the Sex Diversity of Orthopaedic Residency Programs in the United States.

The American Medical Association Fellowship and Residency Electronic Interactive Database was used to identify all allopathic orthopaedic surgery residency programs during the 2021 to 2022 academic year. The number of female residents and interns; the number of female faculty, professors, and associate professors; and the number of women in leadership positions were compared with data from the academic year 2016 to 2017. Continuous data were analyzed with independent t-tests, and significance was set at p < 0.05. A total of 696 female residents (19.2%) were identified from 3,624 orthopaedic residents, an increase from 13.5% in 2016. Programs in the top quartile of female residents had 3 times the number of female residents per program when compared to other quartiles and almost double the number of female interns per program. Programs in the top quartile of female residents had a significantly greater number of female faculty per program than the lower quartiles; 5.76 vs. 4.18. Compared with 2016 to 2017, there were significant increases in female faculty per program from 2.77 to 4.54 along with female full professors from 0.274 to 0.694. These increases contribute to the overall growth in the number of women in leadership positions per program over the past 5 years to 1.01 from 0.35 (p < 0.001). In the past 5 years, the percentage of female residents has increased from 13.5% to 19.2%. Furthermore, women make up 22.1% of interns. Orthopaedic surgery residency programs with higher percentages of female faculty had higher numbers of female residents. By encouraging programs to promote female representation within leadership and residents, we may continue to see the gap in orthopaedic sex diversity close. III.

The Futures of the Faculty Promotion Regulations in Iran: a scenario approach

The purpose of this research was to evaluate the effects of drivers, macro trends and uncertainties related to them in the course of developing the future regulations for the promotion of university faculty members, and drawing alternative scenarios about the promotion regulations in the horizon of 2035. For this purpose, relying on qualitative methodology and using cross-effect analysis matrix tools and MicMac software, the main drivers of change in this field were identified and analyzed. Then, by using the Senario Wizard software and expert panel, the main uncertainties were determined and possible scenarios for the future of the regulations for the promotion of faculty members in the horizon of 2035 were explained and narrated. According to this, while analyzing the structural relationships of impact and effectiveness among key components, five dominant forces of discourse of higher education in Iran including society's expectation (industry, market and government) from higher education, economy of higher education, competitiveness and internationalization of higher education and emerging challenges and development of interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary sciences were considered as drivers of change. Finally, the three scenarios of "Wisdom and Knowledge Think Tank", "Science and Technology University" and "Logic and Value School" as alternative futures for the promotion system of academic faculty members were explained and the conditions of the regulations in each of the mentioned scenarios were described and compared with each other.

Book Stories: 20 Years of Library Book Plate Celebrations

Using storytelling as a framework, this study analyzes a faculty promotion book plating ritual through the lens of a twenty-year corpus of faculty-created and library-gathered data. The sources for this analysis are faculty reasons for book selection, or “book stories,” which are part of an annual book plating ritual at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign library to celebrate promotion and tenure. Findings include increased personal information sharing over time. Libraries in the midst of pandemic reinventions should consider sustaining, reviving, and innovating new forms of storytelling to extend the impact of the library as the bedrock of academic community.

Study of anxiety among medical teachers about the recent change in “publication-based faculty promotions” as per the National Medical Commission Guidelines 2022

Background: Primarily collegiate promotions, placement retention, professional progress, and career mobility of any medical fraternity are determined by the growth in their research productivity. Universities and medical institutes also recruit and promote those academicians who have voluminous resume with ample number of publications. However, the mandatory criteria for article publication and the frequent changes made in them, challenge the medical professionals and create a sense of anxiety and insecurity in them about their future prospects. This study aims at screening these medical academicians, for generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) in response to the recent change in "Minimum Teachers Eligibility Qualifications in Medical Institutions Regulations" as per the National Medical Commission (NMC) guidelines 2022. Materials and Methods: It was a cross-sectional pilot study conducted in two medical institutes including 76 medical teachers due for their promotions. Knowledge and anxiety towards the recent change in "Minimum Teachers Eligibility Qualifications in Medical Institutions Regulations" as per the NMC guidelines 2022 was assessed by the GAD-7 scoring system with help of a questionnaire. The medical professionals were grouped into minimal, mild, moderate, and severe anxiety depending on their GAD-7 score. Results: Hundred percent of medical teachers were aware of the recent changes in the promotion criteria laid down by the NMC in February 2022. 31.57% and 34.78% of medical professionals were found to have mild and moderate anxiety respectively about the promotion criteria. Although less, but 15% of them were screened to be severely anxious about the same matter. Conclusion: All the study participants were updated about the recent changes in the promotion criteria put forward by NMC in February 2022 but this revision has created a sense of apprehension and uncertainty among the medical professionals regarding their due promotions.

Modeling University Faculty Member’s Digital Image

Introduction. The discussion of the shaping of a digital image of university faculty member is driven by the need for effective educational interaction between students and faculty in the context of digitalization. However, there are practically no studies of the faculty’s image as a system, as well as technologies for modeling the faculty’s digital image. The objective of this study is to model faculty’s digital image for purposes of decision-making in the process of managing digital image in educational interactions. Materials and Methods. Secondary data were received through methods of content analysis and systemic and structural-functional evaluation of information. Primary data were obtained through comparative marketing study of faculty’s digital image on a sample of 400 students and 92 faculty members of a Moscow-based and a regional university and through an expert survey. Methods of multivariate scaling and analysis of statistically significant differences were also applied. Results. Novelty of the study lies in incorporating basic and instrumental core components in the model of university faculty’s digital image due to a dual role of “digital competence” element. The image modeling technique is also developed. It is noticed that faculty’s digital competence is not only an element in the structure of faculty’s image, but also a tool that transmits the image to external environment. Based on results of the study, recommendations on implementation of technique of faculty member’s digital image modeling are proposed. Revealed differences in opinions of students and faculty of two universities can be attributed to unequal access to digital technologies in different regions. Discussion and Conclusion. Conclusions made by authors contribute to development of scientific thought on shaping and promotion of university faculty’s digital image. Results of the comparative study will enable the Moscow-based and regional universities faculty to differentiate and precisely approach issues of shaping and promoting personal digital image.

Racial and Ethnic Differences in Internal Medicine Residency Assessments

Previous studies have demonstrated racial and ethnic inequities in medical student assessments, awards, and faculty promotions at academic medical centers. Few data exist about similar racial and ethnic disparities at the level of graduate medical education. To examine the association between race and ethnicity and performance assessments among a national cohort of internal medicine residents. This retrospective cohort study evaluated assessments of performance for 9026 internal medicine residents from the graduating classes of 2016 and 2017 at Accreditation Council of Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)-accredited internal medicine residency programs in the US. Analyses were conducted between July 1, 2020, and June 31, 2022. The primary outcome was midyear and year-end total ACGME Milestone scores for underrepresented in medicine (URiM [Hispanic only; non-Hispanic American Indian, Alaska Native, or Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander only; or non-Hispanic Black/African American]) and Asian residents compared with White residents as determined by their Clinical Competency Committees and residency program directors. Differences in scores between Asian and URiM residents compared with White residents were also compared for each of the 6 competency domains as supportive outcomes. The study cohort included 9026 residents from 305 internal medicine residency programs. Of these residents, 3994 (44.2%) were female, 3258 (36.1%) were Asian, 1216 (13.5%) were URiM, and 4552 (50.4%) were White. In the fully adjusted model, no difference was found in the initial midyear total Milestone scores between URiM and White residents, but there was a difference between Asian and White residents, which favored White residents (mean [SD] difference in scores for Asian residents: -1.27 [0.38]; P < .001). In the second year of training, White residents received increasingly higher scores relative to URiM and Asian residents. These racial disparities peaked in postgraduate year (PGY) 2 (mean [SD] difference in scores for URiM residents, -2.54 [0.38]; P < .001; mean [SD] difference in scores for Asian residents, -1.9 [0.27]; P < .001). By the final year 3 assessment, the gap between White and Asian and URiM residents' scores narrowed, and no racial or ethnic differences were found. Trends in racial and ethnic differences among the 6 competency domains mirrored total Milestone scores, with differences peaking in PGY2 and then decreasing in PGY3 such that parity in assessment was reached in all competency domains by the end of training. In this cohort study, URiM and Asian internal medicine residents received lower ratings on performance assessments than their White peers during the first and second years of training, which may reflect racial bias in assessment. This disparity in assessment may limit opportunities for physicians from minoritized racial and ethnic groups and hinder physician workforce diversity.