# GeNext MedEd Foundation — Faculty & Mentor Connect Standard

Status: institutional working standard

## Purpose
Create a verified human academic network connecting professional identity and expertise to teaching roles, mentorship availability, programme assignments, research mentorship, academic review and a durable contribution history.

## Core principle
Verify the person; define the role; record the contribution.

A verified faculty profile is not blanket certification of every skill. Academic roles arise from specific programme, project, institution, event, community or review assignments.

## Faculty pathway
Verified professional identity → expertise profile → academic roles → mentorship availability → matching/engagement → programme/research contribution → feedback/review → contribution history.

## Profile layers
### Verified professional information
Identity; qualifications; professional registration where relevant; specialty; current institutional affiliation(s); other fields that have passed the defined verification process.

### Declared expertise and interests
Focused clinical/academic domains; teaching interests; research/methodology interests; learner levels; mentorship areas; languages; teaching formats. These should be distinguishable from independently verified credentials.

### Assigned roles
Programme faculty; clinical mentor; workshop instructor; research mentor/investigator; methodology advisor; reviewer; examiner/assessor; academic-community or committee role; event academic role; resource curator/reviewer. Each role has source, scope and dates/status.

### Verified contribution history
Completed academic contributions derived from actual programme/project/event/resource records.

## Mentor Connect
Mentorship types may include longitudinal learner mentorship, focused clinical/academic mentorship, fellowship mentorship, research mentorship, writing/publication mentorship, conference/abstract mentorship and appropriately scoped peer/near-peer mentorship.

### Minimum mentorship record
Mentorship ID/status; mentee; mentor; context; type; objectives; scope/boundaries; duration; communication rhythm; milestones/reviews; conflicts/disclosures where relevant; closure/outcome.

### Matching factors
Objective; specialty/domain; mentorship type; learner/training stage; mentor expertise; declared availability; institution/programme context; time commitment; conflicts; communication mode; duration/end point.

## Assignment workflow
Need defined → expertise match → role invitation → acceptance → contribution → activity verification → contribution-history update.

Role acceptance should make responsibilities, duration, boundaries and relevant conflicts visible. Faculty should be able to decline or limit availability.

## Research mentorship
Faculty profiles can expose research interests and methodology expertise to Research Connect. A research mentorship/project role is recorded within the project and follows the project's governance, contribution and authorship standards. Mentorship alone does not guarantee authorship.

## Programme integration
Fellowships, workshops and courses can assign programme director, academic lead, coordinator, faculty, mentor, assessor and reviewer roles. Contribution records derive from the controlled programme/cohort record rather than self-entered claims alone.

## Conference integration
Conference roles can include invited faculty, session chair/moderator, instructor, reviewer, abstract mentor or other academic role. The event's authority and programme record remain the source of verification.

## Academic communities
Faculty may participate in specialty or cross-cutting academic communities such as Research Connect groups. Community leadership/service is recorded with remit and period; community membership does not create regulatory authority.

## Contribution-history categories
Teaching; workshop instruction; fellowship mentorship; research mentorship/project role; conference academic role; academic-resource contribution; assessment/examiner role; peer/academic review; committee/community service; programme leadership; publications/scholarly outputs; faculty-development participation.

## Feedback and quality
Feedback supports development and programme quality. It should not be reduced to a public popularity marketplace. Private learner/reviewer feedback remains appropriately controlled. Any public indicators should be evidence-led and contextual rather than simplistic star ratings.

## Privacy and boundaries
- Protect private learner/mentee discussions and feedback.
- Do not publicly expose confidential review comments or research information.
- Mentorship does not create a doctor-patient relationship or employment relationship.
- Profile verification does not itself confer clinical privileges.
- Institutional affiliations and roles should show current/historical status accurately.
- Conflicts of interest should be disclosed where relevant to an assignment.

## Digital Faculty & Mentor Connect
GeNext Connect can progressively support verified profiles, expertise taxonomy, availability settings, mentor discovery, role invitations, mentorship workspaces, programme assignments, research-project roles, review milestones, notifications and contribution history.

## Relationship to other Foundation layers
- Fellowships: programme faculty, mentors, assessors and longitudinal contribution records.
- Workshops/Courses: instructors and skills faculty.
- Conferences: academic faculty and reviewer roles.
- Research Connect: research mentors, investigators and methodology expertise.
- Institution Connect: verified affiliations and institutional roles.
- Academic Resource Library: faculty-authored/reviewed resources.
- Journey & Archive: durable academic contribution history.

## Continuity
A faculty member's historical contribution remains linked to the activity even if their current institution, role or availability changes. Current status and historical attribution should be distinguishable.