2009 Promotion and Tenure Update. Faculty Promotion System Overarching Values and Principles Promotion based entirely on accomplishment For all tracks.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Maximizing Your Chances for Promotion and Tenure School of Medicine March 19, 2013.
Advertisements

Promotion Information Session Non-Tenure Track Assistant Professors 4/11/13.
Promotion Information Session Tenure-Track Assistant Professors 4/4/13.
Tenure is awarded when the candidate successfully demonstrates meritorious performance in teaching, research/scholarly/creative accomplishment and service.
Promotion and Tenure Workshop for MUSM Faculty A Faculty Development Opportunity Mercer University School of Medicine 2012.
THE PROMOTION AND TENURE PROCESS New Academic Administrators Workshop August 8,
Tenure and Promotion for Extension Faculty: Tips for the Evaluated and the Evaluators Larry Smith Executive Senior Vice Provost Utah State University Annual.
PEER REVIEW OF TEACHING WORKSHOP SUSAN S. WILLIAMS VICE DEAN ALAN KALISH DIRECTOR, UNIVERSITY CENTER FOR ADVANCEMENT OF TEACHING ASC CHAIRS — JAN. 30,
PROMOTION AND TENURE FOR CLINICAL ATTENDINGS Sameh Abul-Ezz, M.D. Carmelita Pablo, M.D.
Promotion and Tenure Planning Workshop Spring 2013 Susan S. Williams Vice Provost for Academic Policy and Faculty Resources.
Pathology Faculty Promotions November, 2013 Faculty Meeting.
2015 Workshop Permanent Status and Promotion Policy and Procedures Overview.
Tenure and Promotion The Process: –Outlined in Article 15 of the FTCA. When you are granted tenure, you are also promoted to Associate (15.7.6). One application.
Stacy A. Rudnicki, M.D. Brendan C. Stack, Jr., M.D., FACS, FACE.
Promotion and Tenure at Ohio University Martin Tuck PhD Associate Provost for Academic Affairs.
Senior Appointments Committee J. M. Friedman, MD, PhD.
McLean Promotion to Associate Professor at Harvard Medical School Maureen T. Connelly, MD, MPH McLean Hospital February 3, 2010.
Promotion and Ten ure October 21, 2014 S. Laurel Weldon Vice Provost for Faculty Affairs (Interim) PURDUE FACULTY.
Kim Gingerich, Assistant to V-P, Academic & Provost Lisa Weber, Administrative Secretary, Dean of Science Marie Armstrong, Associate University Secretary.
Promotion and Ten ure October 15, 2013 S. Laurel Weldon Vice Provost for Faculty Affairs (Interim) PURDUE FACULTY.
Promotion and Tenure Lois J. Geist, M.D. Associate Dean for Faculty Affairs and Development.
Materials presented are for general informational purposes only and do not constitute official University rules, policies or practices or interpretations.
PROMOTION AND TENURE FOR CLINICAL ATTENDINGS Rhonda Dick, M.D. Tim Martin, M.D.
Promotion and Tenure for Chairs, Heads, & Administrators: Twin Cities Arlene Carney Vice Provost for Faculty & Academic Affairs.
Academic Advancement As A Clinician Educator Donald W. Reynolds Foundation Grantee 2010 Annual Meeting Daniel Swagerty, MD, MPH Professor, Departments.
October 27, 2011 MUSC Faculty Senate Promotion and Tenure Workshop.
PROMOTION AND TENURE FOR CLINICAL SCIENTISTS – BOTH PATHWAYS Peter Emanuel, M.D. Laura Lamps, M.D.
PROMOTION AND TENURE FOR CLINICAL EDUCATORS Michele Moss, M.D. Alexander Burnett, M.D.
Promotion in the Clinical Track Lois J. Geist, M.D. Associate Dean for Faculty Affairs and Development.
+ Meeting of Assistant Professors June 29, Faculty and Academic Affairs Leadership Steven Abramson, M.D., Vice Dean for Education, Faculty and.
College of Liberal Arts Tenure and Promotion workshop: PROCEDURES AND POLICIES 17 October 2014.
PROMOTION AND TENURE: THE LONG AND WINDING ROAD. WHAT ARE THE RANKS? WHAT DO THEY MEAN? ASSISTANT PROFESSOR ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR PROFESSOR –NOT THE “PHILOSOPAUSE”
Promotion Process A how-to for DEOs. How is a promotion review initiated? Required in the final probationary year of a tenure track appointment (year.
Preparing for the renewal and tenure processes Bernard Robaire Department of Pharmacology and Therapeutics MAUT Tenure Workshop April 24, 2015 – Faculty.
Promotion and Tenure Planning Workshop Spring 2012 Susan S. Williams Vice Provost for Academic Policy and Faculty Resources.
POST-TENURE REVIEW: Report and Recommendations. 2 OVERVIEW Tenure Field Test Findings Recommendations This is a progress report. Implementation, assessment,
Promotions on the Clinician Educator Track Larry L. Swift, Ph.D. Vice Chair for Faculty Affairs Department of Pathology, Microbiology & Immunology.
PROMOTION AND TENURE: THE LONG AND WINDING ROAD. WHAT ARE THE RANKS? WHAT DO THEY MEAN? ASSISTANT PROFESSOR ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR PROFESSOR –NOT THE “PHILOSOPAUSE”
Promotion and Ten ure October 2015 Alyssa Panitch Vice Provost for Faculty Affairs PURDUE FACULTY.
PROMOTION AND TENURE FOR CLINICAL EDUCATORS Laura Lamps, M.D. Stacy Rudnicki, M.D.
Matthew L. S. Gboku DDG/Research Coordinator Sierra Leone Agricultural Research Institute Presentation at the SLARI Annual Retreat 26 – 28 October, 2015.
PROMOTION AND TENURE FOR BASIC SCIENTISTS – BOTH PATHWAYS Dana Gaddy, Ph.D. Patricia Wight, Ph.D.
Promotions on the Physician Scientist/Basic Science Investigator Track Larry L. Swift, Ph.D. Vice Chair for Faculty Affairs Department of Pathology, Microbiology.
CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, HAYWARD Academic Affairs MEMORANDUM DATE: October 3, 1995 T0: Department Chairs FROM: Frank Martino Provost & Vice President,
Overview of Policies and Procedures University of Missouri-Kansas City.
Promotion Information Session New faculty 1/26/16.
P&T Update: College of Medicine, Carol S. Weisman, PhD Associate Dean for Faculty Affairs Distinguished Professor of Public Health Sciences.
An Overview of the Promotion & Tenure Process UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY NEW FACULTY ORIENTATION AUGUST 20, 2015 KATIE CARDARELLI, PHD ASSOCIATE DEAN FOR ACADEMIC.
Promotion and Tenure. Quick overview of P&T Requirements Each of these areas has a defined standard/benchmark that faculty are expected to achieve (below-meet-exceed)
Your Career as a Student Advocate Promotion and Tenure Steven Specter, PhD University of South Florida College of Medicine Tampa, FL.
Tenure and Promotion at University of Toledo
Tenure: How to Prepare for It
Promotion & Tenure Program
FY16 Promotion and Tenure Debrief
Promotion to Full Professor: Regulations and Procedures
Faculty Toolkit: Promotion & Tenure
Your Career at Queen’s: Merit Review and Renewal, Tenure, & Promotion New Faculty Orientation August 24, 2017 Teri Shearer Deputy Provost (Academic.
2017 Workshop Tenure and Promotion Policy and Procedures Overview
We’re going to follow the chronological order of the process.
Achieving Tenure and Promotion
2016 Tenure and Promotion Workshop Policy and Procedures Overview
Heather Brod, Executive Director of Faculty Affairs and FAME
Promotions on the Physician Scientist/Basic Science Investigator Track
Lecture Track Faculty Reappointment & Promotion ECAS
Promotion on the Clinician Educator and Clinical Practice Tracks
Promotion and Tenure Workshop Fall Vice Provost for Faculty Affairs
Promotion to Full Professor: Regulations and Procedures
Promotion & Tenure workshop
Preparing for the Midcourse (third- or fourth-year) Review
Tenure and Promotion: Crossing the Finish Line
Presentation transcript:

2009 Promotion and Tenure Update

Faculty Promotion System Overarching Values and Principles Promotion based entirely on accomplishment For all tracks the target for promotion is a national level of recognition and impact - Tenure track and Regular Clinical track viewed as parallel pathways – dictated by how the faculty member is deployed All three missions equally important

2009 Promotion and Tenure Update Process The university defines a date by which the dossiers from the College are due to the University. This is usually in February or March. COM is the only college (thus far) that has moved to a rolling submission date. The ultimate deadline for submissions is driven by the time needed to complete the review and place it on the Board of Trustees calendar). Currently we can receive a dossier at the COM as late as March and still have enough time to complete the COM and University reviews. This does not mean that departments should delay in sending their dossiers until March!

2009 Promotion and Tenure Update Process Faculty appointments are based on the academic year (beginning July 1). Faculty with a start date through February are deemed to have begun the previous July. Faculty with a start date of March 1 or later are deemed to have started the following July 1. Each year the University (OAA) defines the content of the promotion dossier (usually with minimal changes from one year to the next).

2009 Promotion and Tenure Update Process Under the standard review schedule, dossiers are due in the COM usually in early November. To accommodate this deadline, department’s typically conduct their reviews in the early fall (which means that letters are often solicited in the summer). After the department review is completed the dossier is reviewed by the COM Committee which makes a recommendation to the Dean. The Dean’s recommendation is then forwarded to the University Committee, which makes a recommendation to the Provost, who then makes a final recommendation to the Board.

2009 Promotion and Tenure Update Process Faculty members are entitled to review the complete contents of their dossier, including letters of evaluation. Ohio is an “open records” state, and external evaluations are notified that their letters may be seen by the candidate. University rules require that when the review process is completed at each level the candidate has the right to review the decision letters and to offer comments. At this point there is no mechanism to monitor progress of the dossier (other than the comments process). Another mechanism is being developed that could be adapted for this purpose.

2009 Promotion and Tenure Update Process – Time Extension Exclusions of time from the probationary period allow up to three years to be excluded. Birth or adoption of a child is automatically approved. Other justifications of causes outside the candidate’s control are also accepted. The faculty member requests in writing an exclusion. This is considered by the Department’s Promotion and tenure Committee which then makes a recommendation to the Department Chairman. This is then forwarded to the Dean who makes a recommendation to the provost.

2009 Promotion and Tenure Update Process – Switching Tracks Tenure to Clinical or Research – There are no adverse affects of switching to the clinical or research track if performance does not bode well for a positive tenure decision. The person cannot “switch” back but may be considered for a tenure track position when their accomplishments merit. Several recent examples where this has occurred. This is viewed as a new position – not an extension of the previous position. Deadlines?

2009 Promotion and Tenure Update Content Issues Faculty are evaluated on the total body of accomplishment – scholarship, teaching, and service. All regular faculty are expected to have contributions in these areas. The relative weight of emphasis varies according to track (clinical, tenure, research). From the COM Promotion and Tenure Document: “The awarding of tenure and promotion to the rank of associate professor must be based on clear and convincing evidence that the candidate has developed a regional or national level of impact and recognition as demonstrated by…”

Promotion on the Regular Clinical Track From the COM P&T document: The awarding of promotion to the rank of associate professor on the regular clinical track must be based upon clear and convincing evidence that that the candidate has developed a regional or national level of impact and recognition. Parallel pathways – parallel expectations Pathways to national recognition – clinical, education, service

2009 Promotion and Tenure Update Content Issues Impact of the NIH funding crisis? There is no COM requirement for NIH funding. Although desirable for many reasons, the expectation defined in the COM P&T document is nationally competitive peer reviewed funding. Increased emphasis – and development of explicit criteria to address credit for team science.

2009 Promotion and Tenure Update Content Issues P&T process has two distinct components: evaluation and advocacy – in that order. The fundamental principle of the academic process is rigorous peer review. The University expects that concurrent with the notion that the department faculty are in the best position to evaluate a faculty member, that they will in fact conduct an appropriate evaluation, and use appropriate standards. Assuming a positive outcome of the evaluation, the Department (eligible faculty and Chairman) then become advocates, without glossing over obvious weaknesses.

2009 Promotion and Tenure Update Content Issues COM Committee does not necessarily know the specific journals in a special field or subfield. Often the very best journals in a “niche” area have very low impact factors. It is up to the Department to educate their COM colleagues. If there are other more important metrics that speak to the quality and impact of the work, the Department is welcome to present those data. This should be explained in the Department P&T document and should be reflected in the letter from the eligible faculty and/or the Department Chair.

2009 Promotion and Tenure Update Content Issues The review of scholarship expects that in today’s world, faculty will be engaged in research groups, and will have some publications on which they are first or senior authors and other publications in which they have a less prominent role. The evaluation of a record of scholarship is based on an assessment as a body of work that a faculty member has demonstrated an area of emphasis for which they are known. The balancing act between secondary role in first tier journals versus primary roles in second tier journals is difficult to quantify.

2009 Promotion and Tenure Update Content Issues – Grants vs. Papers Grants are important as an index of the quality of the idea, but for most of us they are a means to an end. Does anyone have an impact on their field solely or primarily because they get grants (but don’t publish)? For most people, high quality peer-reviewed science is the coin of the realm by which impact and reputation is developed. In this funding era – positive comments “pink sheets” can be helpful – particularly if they demonstrate a gradual improvement. PI vs. Co-I

2009 Promotion and Tenure Update Content Issues All faculty are evaluated in teaching, service, and scholarship. The operational definitions of what is included in these arenas are extremely broad: Teaching can include didactics; supervision of fellows, students, post-docs; grand rounds or other CME activities. Important (and easy) to document. Service can include clinical service, department or institution committees, service on advisory groups, service on professional committees, review activities (editorial boards, grant reviews) Credit for these activities is not mutually exclusive

Important Components of the Process Annual written reviews – mandatory Peer review of teaching Make sure that letters of evaluation are “arms length”

2009 Promotion and Tenure Update Common Pitfalls in Presenting the Case Don’t assume that the COM Committee will understand the importance of an accomplishment. Don’t under-sell – as long as there as good data to back it up. Analyze the trajectory Don’t ignore or minimize obvious weaknesses. Candidate’s are evaluated on the total dossier, weakness in an area can be explained or offset by extraordinary accomplishment in other areas.