UNASSIGNED: Trainees and faculty in academic medicine often struggle with self-promotion. Barriers may be more formidable for women and other groups underrepresented in medicine. Experience-based stories illustrating personal strengths are preferable when engaging in self-promotion activities.
UNASSIGNED: We developed a 90- to 120-minute workshop utilizing approaches such as iterative journaling and peer discussion to teach the development of problem-action-result (PAR) stories for self-promotion efforts in interviews and written applications to new positions. Participants provided Likert-scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree) and free-response evaluations, which we analyzed for workshop strengths and areas for improvement.
UNASSIGNED: We presented the workshop in person to 28 pediatric residents and subsequently to 22 residents, fellows, and faculty at an in-person national meeting. Sixty-one percent of the resident group and 100% of the national workshop group completed the evaluation. Both groups reported high satisfaction with the workshop\'s format (M = 4.7) and content (M = 4.7) and indicated intention to use the skills learned (M = 4.7). Strengths included the PAR format, interactivity, journaling, opportunity for reflection, and tips for interviewing and writing. Areas to improve included offering the workshop earlier in the academic year and providing more written examples of PAR stories.
UNASSIGNED: This workshop used strategies of personal reflection, journaling, and peer feedback to help participants understand behavior-based recruiting practices and the PAR framework as a strategy for successful self-promotion. Learners can use these strategies to develop greater confidence and efficacy and to address barriers to effective self-promotion they encounter.

UNASSIGNED: There is a growing body of literature on gender bias in letters of recommendation (LORs) in academic medicine and the negative effect of bias on promotion and career advancement. Thus, increasing knowledge about gender bias and developing skills to mitigate it is important for advancing gender equity in medicine. This workshop aims to provide participants with knowledge about linguistic bias (focused on gender), how to recognize it, and strategies to apply to mitigate it when writing LORs.
UNASSIGNED: We developed an interactive 60-minute workshop for faculty and graduate medical education program directors consisting of didactics, reflection exercises, and group activities. We used a postworkshop survey to evaluate the effectiveness of the workshop. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze Likert-scale questions and a thematic content analysis for open-ended prompts.
UNASSIGNED: We presented the workshop four times (two local and two national conferences) with one in-person and one virtual format for each. There were 50 participants who completed a postworkshop survey out of 74 total participants (68% response rate). Ninety-nine percent of participants felt the workshop met its educational objectives, and 100% felt it was a valuable use of their time. Major themes described for intended behavior change included utilization of the gender bias calculator, mindful use and balance of agentic versus communal traits, closer attention to letter length, and dissemination of this knowledge to colleagues.
UNASSIGNED: This workshop was an effective method for helping participants recognize gender bias when writing LORs and learn strategies to mitigate it.

UNASSIGNED: The goal of academic mentoring relationships is to enable the mentee to identify/achieve professional advancement. Although mentors of clinician educators (CEs) must understand the criteria for successful career advancement, few have received formal CE mentor training.
UNASSIGNED: The National Research Mentoring Network convened an expert panel to develop a 90-minute module for training CE mentors. This module included individual development plans, case studies involving challenges for CE faculty, and examples of the broadened scope of scholarly activity. The workshop was delivered to 26 participants across four institutions and evaluated by a retrospective pre/post survey.
UNASSIGNED: Using a 7-point scale (1 = very low, 4 = average, 7 = very high), participants rated the overall quality of their CE mentoring as slightly below average preworkshop (M = 3.9) and as above average postworkshop (M = 5.2, p < .001). Areas of greatest self-perceived change in skills on a 7-point scale (1 = not at all skilled, 4 = moderately skilled, 7 = extremely skilled ) included setting clear expectations of the mentoring relationship (pre M = 3.6, post M = 5.1, p < .001), aligning mentor expectations with those of mentees (pre M = 3.6, post M = 5.0, p < .001), and helping mentees set career goals (pre M = 3.9, post M = 5.4, p < .001).
UNASSIGNED: This module trains CE mentors using an interactive and collective problem-solving approach. Workshop participants better defined demonstrable markers for CE progression with potential to impact tailored guidance for mentees.

As a result of the common belief that professionals in academic medicine make less money than their private practice counterparts, as well as the rising cost of medical school and subsequent loans, medical students and residents alike are dissuaded from pursuing careers in academia. However, with greater knowledge of loan repayment programs and financial planning, students can make informed decisions about entering the field of academia.
Using the Kern model, a workshop was developed to educate medical students considering an academic career about financial resources, loan repayment, student debt, and the importance of budgets. The workshop also encouraged reflection on personal and financial factors that influence career choice.
The workshop was implemented at five regional conferences with a total of 113 participants. After participating in the workshop, survey data showed that participants were statistically less likely to agree with the statement \"Student debt will hinder my ability to pursue an academic medicine career,\" and more likely to agree with the statement \"Academic medicine is a financially viable career choice for me\" and \"A career in academic medicine will provide a comfortable salary.\" Over 95% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that each objective was met.
This workshop provided an interactive and reflective method to increase participants\' awareness of factors that influence financial considerations when considering postgraduate career choices. It highlighted factors that may be particularly relevant for an academic career choice and of resources available, especially loan repayment programs, to ensure a financially viable academic career.