Michael J. Chusid MD

Professor (ID) & Associate Chair

Departemnt of Pediatrics

The Promotion ProcessDepartment of Pediatrics

October 18, 2006

Promotion Process

The “Golden Link:” http://www.mcw.edu/display/router.asp?docid=6238

Navigating the Promotion Process at MCW

• Promotion Pathways– Description– Criteria for promotion

• Tenure– Meaning– Criteria

• Promotion Process– Departmental– CHW

• Promotion DO’s and DON’Ts

Promotion Criteria:Traditional Track

• History of independent research activity and peer reviewed publications

• Excellence in clinical and teaching activities

• Service to MCW (committees, councils)

• Established reputation– Associate Professor: Regional– Professor:National

Promotion CriteriaResearch Track

• Independent funding and publications

• Role in defined research program or direct core facility

• Role in research training

• Reputation– Associate Professor: Regional– Professor: National

Research

Research Clinical

Teaching Admininstration

Promotion CriteriaClinician Educator

• Excellence in teaching/education• Excellence in clinical practice• Scholarship

– Development/dissemination of materials

– Publications• Clinical observations• Education

• Service to institution

Background to definition of a 4th promotional pathway

• Expansion of the clinical enterprise critical to overall mission of MCW.

• Faculty providing high amounts of clinical care and administration may not “fit” current paths.

• Chusid Ad Hoc Committee recommended a 4th academic pathway.

• Dean appointed an ad hoc committee to review rationale for (and against) creation of a 4th pathway- including examination of experience from other academic institutions- and to determine criteria for promotion in this pathway.

The Fourth Track

• Academic Clinician Pathway was approved in spring 2006.

• Faculty with appointments in this pathway will have titles of the form: Assistant Professor of Clinical XXX (e.g. Orthopedic Medicine).

• For faculty with predominantly clinical or administrative responsibilities (>80%)

• Faculty in this pathway are not eligible for tenure• Anticipated time to promotion from first faculty

appointment is 10 years

• Board certification in the appropriate specialty is expected.

• Service to the college or clinical practice partners, such as committee participation, is desirable.

• For those whose position includes a substantial clinical administrative role, evidence of the performance of the clinical program or group is considered.

The Fourth Track- Academic Clinician- continued

•Faculty in the Academic Clinician Path should spend a preponderance of time and should have attained substantial expertise in clinical care and/or clinical administration. Evidence of accomplishment includes items such as, but not necessarily limited to: quality of care indicators, patient satisfaction measures, the development of a referral base, the development of clinical care pathways.

•They should additionally have demonstrated a sustained commitment to and excellence in teaching. Evidence of accomplishment includes teaching awards or demand for clinical rotations by trainees.

The Fourth Track- Academic Clinician

Academic Clinician

Research Clinical Teaching Admininstration

TENURE

• Available only to those in the Traditional or Clinician-Educator track.

• Usually awarded at the Professor level.• Criteria are the same for both tracks and are

distinct from criteria used for promotion.• Awarded to those individuals vital to the

school’s successful attainment of its multiple missions: clinical, educational, and academic.

• Meaning: An academic merit badge?

DEPARTMENT OF PEDIATRICS PROMOTION GUIDELINES

***ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR***

TRADITIONAL TRACK

CLINICIAN EDUCATOR

TRACK

RESEARCH TRACK

ACADEMIC CLINICIAN

# YEARS IN RANK (average) 6 6 6 10

PUBLICATIONS+ (INCLUDING CHAPTERS, REVIEWS, BUT NOT LETTERS, ABSTRACTS)

20 8 20 __

EVIDENCE OF BEING AN INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATOR (COMPETITIVE NATIONAL GRANTS, ETC.)

++ +/- ++ __

EVIDENCE OF OUTSTANDING CLINICAL, TEACHING, AND ADMINISTRATIVE SKILLS

+ ++ +/- ++

+Type of publication, reputation of journal and position of name on list of authors are all important in assessing quality of publication.

DEPARTMENT OF PEDIATRICSPROMOTION GUIDELINES

***PROFESSOR***

TRADITIONAL TRACK

CLINICIAN EDUCATOR TRACK

RESEARCH TRACK

ACADEMIC CLINICIAN

TRACK

# YEARS IN RANK (average) 6 6 6 10

PUBLICATIONS+ 50 30 50 __

LARGELY CONTINUOUS GRANT FUNDING, NATIONAL RECOGNITION AS AN INVESTIGATOR

++ +/- ++ __

NATIONAL LEVEL RECOGNITION AS A CLINICIAN, EDUCATOR, OR ADMINISTRATOR

+ ++ +/- ++

+The departmental promotions committee will consider for promotion only those individuals recommended by their section head or if a section head, by the departmental chair. For those individuals not so recommended who wish to be considered, a departmental appeals process exists.

Five Steps of Promotion Process

• Internal Promotions Committee reviews• Nomination by Chair submitted to Dean’s

Office• Office of Faculty Affairs prepares packet• R&T committee reviews materials and

renders decision• Final approval by Dean & MCW Board of

Directors

Department of PediatricsPromotions Committee

Committee meets in September/October.

Reviews candidates for promotion or tenure proposed by Section Heads or Chair (for Section Head promotion).

Committee makes advisory recommendations to Chair for his action.

PROMOTION TO SENIOR FACULTY RANK

• By October 1 (Tenure, Traditional Track promotions) or January 1 (all other track promotions) departmental Chairmen must provide the Dean’s Office with the following information regarding faculty proposed for promotion to Associate or full Professor.– An up-to-date curriculum vitae in standard MCW format:

http://www.mcw.edu/display/router.asp?docid=1586– A detailed proposal letter from the Chair stating both

proposed rank and track.– The names of at least four internal referees and two to

seven external referees (depending on rank/track).– Reprints of two representative publications.

THE PROCESS – “THE CHAIRMAN”

PROMOTION TO SENIOR FACULTY RANK

• The Faculty Affairs Office will then:– Solicit letters of recommendation from the referees, providing them

with the Chairs’ proposal letter, curriculum vitae, reprints, and general criteria for promotion at MCW in the proposed track.

• When the requisite number of referees have responded, the packet will be sent to the Rank and Tenure Committee which meets regularly on the third Thursday of the month.

• The Committee reviews the available material. In some cases, further information may be solicited by the Committee itself.

• If it is felt the packet is complete, the Committee votes on the proposed promotion. At least six votes (of the 11 members) are required for a negative or positive action.

THE PROCESS – “THE DEAN’S OFFICE”

PROMOTION TOSENIOR FACULTY

• If the proposal to promote is affirmed by the Committee, the Dean is so notified.

• The Dean can veto a positive recommendation by the Committee.

• If the Dean makes a positive decision, the proposal is brought to the MCW Board of Directors for their assent.

• If they vote positively, the promotion is approved.• All promotions approved by the MCW Board take

effect on July 1 of the subsequent academic year.

THE PROCESS – “POSITIVE R & T VOTE”

PROMOTION TOSENIOR FACULTY

• If the proposal to promote is defeated in the R & T Committee, the proposing Chair is notified.

• The Chair will be sent a letter by the R & T Chair outlining in general terms the reasons for the negative vote.

• A candidate cannot be proposed for promotion more than once in an academic year.

• An appeals process exists for negative actions by the R & T Committee which involves a formal request by the proposing Chair to provide significant new information to the R & T Committee. The Chair may request a personal appearance before the R&T Committee.

THE PROCESS – “NEGATIVE R & T VOTE”

2006-2007Rank & Tenure Committee –Composition

Eric Cohen, MD (Nephrology) ChairJulie Biller, MD (Pulmonary Medicine)Owen Griffith, PhD (Biochemistry)Cecilia Hillard, PhD (Pharmacology)John Klein, PhD (HPI-Biostatistics)Dennis Maiman, MD (Neurosurgery)Karen Marcdante, MD (Pediatrics)Hershel Raff, PhD (Endocine)Jeanne Seagaard, PhD (Anesthesiology)James Sebastian, MD (General Medicine)

No “Up or out policy”

(promotion to Assoc Prof after 6 yrs as Asst Prof)

Positive: More career flexibility

Negative: Stagnation at Asst Prof level

MCW = State schools

Promotion “DO’s”

• Be prepared– Plan early and review often

• Get input from colleagues, mentors, chairs

• Just being here for a long time does not warrant promotion• Use the MCW format for CV

• Provide complete, accurate information

• Be sure your accomplishments are clearly conveyed– Use explicit descriptions such as “1 of 10 highlighted oral presentations at a national

meeting of >10,000 attendees”– Consider using an “educator’s portfolio” or annotated CV

• Send your best publications

Educator Portfolios

• Way to highlight achievements that are not easy to convey in a CV

• No more than a few single sided pages

• Should highlight “themes” of your career

Educator’s Portfolio

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

OT

E R

ati

ng

2001-2002 2002-2003 2003 2004

Overall Teaching Effectiveness (OTE) Ratings for Dr. X Compared to Department Mean, 2001-2004,1-5

point scale, 1=outstanding

My rating

Dept Mean

Educator’s Portfolio

0

20

40

60

80

100

Pe

rce

nt

MCW 1986-1989 MCW 1990-1995 ABP Mean

Pass Rate on First Attempt, American Board Certifying Examination,

1986-1989 Before my Leadership, 1990-1995 During my Leadership

Portfolio Example for New Track

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Patients seen

Patients seen in Pulmonary Clinic

Sabbatical year

EP: Example

Percent pts receiving enteral feeds

0

20

40

60

80

100

Month

Pe

rce

nt

% receivingenteral feeds

Implementation of protocol

Well before the first step in the promotion process in every

pathway….

• Review your progress and plan with your Section Head on a regular basis- no less than once a year.

• When you identify areas in which your objective accomplishments are weak, define a plan and time frame in which to address these weakness.

Promotion “DO’s”

• Choose your referees carefully– At or above level of promotion

(academicians)– Local: not just all from your section/dept– National: not all from your training– Contact them first,

• ask if they can write “good” letter

– Let them know what to highlight (from what they know about you)

Promotion “DON’Ts”

• Procrastinate– Keep CV and portfolio updated

• Allow typos, incorrect grammar, incomplete citations to creep into your CV.

• Include “wish list” on your submitted CV– Submitted publications, “approved but not funded

grants,” papers “in progress.”

• Mix abstracts, chapters, papers

Promotion “DON’Ts”

• Beware of recommendations from foreign sources– Their academic systems are often not comparable

• Ask for letters from “Harvard-types”– They will be asked “Would candidate be promoted

at your institution?”

• Ask for letters from members of the R&T committee– If they write a letter, they have to leave for

discussion and vote

Summary

• Promotion is the recognition of your peers based on faculty approved criteria

• You are responsible for preparing the documentation needed– Ask for help from the “experts”

• It is not a “secret ritual”. The departmental promotions committee chair and MCW R&T committee all want your promotion to succeed!!

YES