The Promotion Process: Role of the Rank and Tenure Committee

1. The Promotion Process:Role of the Rank and TenureCommittee September 26, 2012 Presentation sponsored by Women’s faculty council joseph b. Layde, m.d., j.d., ChairMAN, Rank and Tenure Committee Slides adapted from set graciously supplied by Cecilia Hillard, Ph.D.

2. Ad Hoc Committee Currently Working on Updates • Ad Hoc Committee on Rank and Tenure meeting since 2011, headed by Craig Porter, M.D. (Pediatrics) • Recommendations will go to Faculty Council this year • Stay tuned!

3. Promotion Criteria • Demonstrated achievement and impact in • Research/Scholarship • Education • Clinical activities • Program development • Service to MCW and affiliates • Four promotion tracks allow a great deal of flexibility • Traditional: PI of federally funded research grants • Research: Research is primary function; not as PI • Clinician Educator: Education is primary function • Academic Clinician: Clinical program development is primary function

4. Traditional Pathway • Independent, extramurally funded researcher • Senior-authored, peer reviewed publications; PI on grants; patents • Significant contributions to the educational mission • Service to MCW and to the broader scientific community • National (Associate) or International (Professor) reputation

5. Research Pathway • Research is the primary emphasis • An essential member of a research team • Lead a critical research core • Independently funded with limited educational contributions • Educational contributions not expected to be large; usually in the realm of research training • Service to MCW; maybe to the broader scientific community • Regional (Associate) or National (Professor) reputation

6. Clinician Educator Pathway • Scholarship and excellence in education or clinical science • Peer-reviewed, scholarly products are expected. We are pretty open about format (book chapters, web-based educational products, for example) • Significant contributions to the educational mission • Service to MCW or hospitals • Regional (Associate) or National (Professor) reputation

7. Academic Clinician Pathway • Excellence in clinical practice; clinical program development • Less emphasis on scholarly products, but need to show impact • Some contribution to the educational mission is expected • Service to MCW or hospitals • Time in rank (10 years as assistant; at least 5 as associate) • Other institutions count; equivalent nonacademic positions. We need explanations if you wish to have these waived.

8. Tenure • Awarded to individuals deemed “vital” to missions of MCW • Is recognition of future promise, based upon accomplishments • Arguments for “vitality” need to be clearly outlined in chair’s letter • Available for Traditional and Clinician Educator tracks; Associate and Professor ranks • Granted independent of promotion, but can be granted at the same time

9. Chair’s Letter • A very important part of the package • Help us focus on the most important contributions of the faculty member to MCW • Can give insights and emphasis to the standard CV information; but no need to reiterate • Explain unusual circumstances that impact progress • Tell us the result of internal promotions committee deliberations

10. Curriculum Vitae • Must be in MCW format; use the faculty collaboration data base • Follow the categories, use those that are appropriate • Feel free to annotate; add a category • Most common problems • Not in MCW format • Mixing between categories • Lack of clarity; details missing • “Padding” • Editorial comment-the CV should be a mentoring and advising “tool”. Should always be up-to-date

11. Educator’s Portfolio • Used most often by those in Clinician Educator and Academic Clinician pathways • Contains additional information beyond the CV (do not duplicate) • Demonstrates impact in education and clinical program development • Quantitative data are better than testimonials • Be concise - no more than 10 pages (we prefer 5)

12. Letters of Reference • At MCW, the candidate and chair pick the references • Rank and tenure has no ability to go outside these lists • As a result, they are usually very laudatory • Most useful in supporting the case for national/international reputation • They are solicited by Office of Faculty Affairs

13. Selecting References • Internal • Best if not all from primary department • External • Must have left MCW more than 5 years ago • Try to get a variety of institutions • All must be at or above the proposed rank • We have some difficulty with referees that are not academics; but we allow one if needed

14. What materials are required when proposed? All of these items are needed in Faculty Affairs by Oct 1 (CE) or Jan 1 (everyone else) • Curriculum vitae • Chair’s letter • Educator’s portfolio (CE/AC pathways) • Names of referees • Two publications Note: Chairs put faculty up for promotion at MCW.

15. Minimum number of references

16. R&T Committee • Rolling process, as soon as the minimum number of letters are received, the packet goes into the queue • Our job is to compare the evidence presented to the requirements • We rarely vote “no”; table for clarification or a discussion with the chair • Communicate decisions with chairs as soon as possible; give feedback if the committee has a message to send

17. The Dean and Board of TrusteesPositive Vote on Promotion/Tenure • Dean notified • Can overturn a positive, not negative vote • If Dean approves, sent to MCW Board of Directors • If Board approves, promotion takes effect July 1st.

18. Negative Vote • R&T chair communicates with departmental chair • Reasons for denial • Must wait until next academic year to resubmit • Appeal process • Chair submits significant new information • Or appeals to committee in person

19. Promotion and MCW Culture • Traditional pathway faculty in the basic science departments and Research pathway faculty must be promoted to associate professor within 7 years of assistant professor appointment; other pathways do not have a clock • Tenure not automatically granted • Professors in Clinician Educator pathway no longer receiving indefinite appointments • The R+T committee traditionally • Works with department to optimize materials • Provides advice regarding CV and portfolio preparation

20. Current Rank & Tenure Composition • Stephen Duncan, Ph.D. (Cell Biology) • Joseph Layde, M.D., J.D. (Psychiatry) • Michael Quasney, M.D., Ph.D. (Pediatrics) • Frank Pintar, Ph.D. (Neurosurgery) • Wai-Meng Kwok, Ph.D. (Anesthesiology) • Craig Young, M.D. (Orthopedics/Sports Med) • Karen Brasel, M.D. (Surgery) • Dara Frank, Ph.D. (Microbiology) • Jeffrey Whittle, M.D. (Medicine) • Jay Sandlow, M.D. (Urology) • Quinn Hogan, M.D. (Anesthesiology)

21. Up-to-date information at Infoscope

22. Faculty Affairs