Transcript DEPARTMENT OF INTERNAL MEDICINE PROMOTIONS COMMITTEE

The Promotion Process
at the Medical College of
Wisconsin
September 19th, 2006
Elizabeth R. Jacobs, M.D.
Pulmonary and Critical Care
Medicine
Navigating the Promotion
Process at MCW
• Promotion Pathways– The new 4th option
• Promotion Process
• Promotion DOs and DON’Ts
Rank & Tenure Committee –Composition
Eric Cohen, MD (Nephrology) Chair
Julie 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)
Research
Traditional Pathway
Clinician Educator
Research
Academic Clinician
Clinical
Teaching
Admininstration
Promotion Criteria
Traditional Track
• History of independent research
funding and peer reviewed
publications
• Service to MCW (committees,
councils)
• Established reputation
– Associate Professor:
– Professor:
National
Regional
Traditional Pathway
Research
Clinical
Teaching
Admininstration
Promotion Criteria
Research Track
• Independent funding and
publications
Research
• Role in defined research program
or direct core facility
• Role in research training
• Reputation
– Associate Professor: Regional
– Professor: National
Research
Clinical
Teaching
Admininstration
Promotion Criteria
Clinician Educator
• Excellence in
teaching/education
• Excellence in clinical practice
• Scholarship
– Development/dissemination of
materials
– Publications
Clinician Educator
• Clinical observations
• Education
• Service to institution
Research
Clinical
Teaching
Admininstration
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
The Fourth Track- Academic
Clinician
•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.
Academic Clinician
Research Clinical
Teaching Admininstration
The Fourth Track- Academic
Clinician- continued
• 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.
Well before the first step in the
promotion process in every
pathway….
• Review your progress and plan with
your Chair 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.
Five Steps of Promotion Process
•
•
•
•
Internal Promotions Committee reviews
Nomination by Chair submitted
Office of Faculty Affairs prepares packet
R&T committee reviews materials and
renders decision
• Final approval by Dean & MCW
Board of Directors
Deadlines:
For July 1st implementation
• Traditional Path and all tenure: Oct 1st
• Clinician Educator, Academic Clinician
& Research: Jan 1st
For updated guidelines, more information
and MCW CV format , see website:
http://www.mcw.edu/facaffairs
Promotion Process:
You and Your Chair
• You provide updated CV
– Use MCW format ONLY
• Chair provides letter of support
– Detailing merit based on criteria for track and rank
– You should provide detailed outline of your
accomplishments in areas of focus for your Chair
• Names of referees
– At least 4 internal
– 2-7 external (depends on track/rank)
• Reprints of 2 “representative” publications
Office of Faculty Affairs
• Solicits letters from the referees.
• Referees are provided
• Full packet (including portfolio)
• Outline of what areas they are to address in their
letters
• MCW promotion criteria for rank and track.
• When the reference letters are received, the
packet is sent to the R&T Committee.
Rank and Tenure Committee
• R&T committee members review packet
– May request additional information
– If need additional info, tables review
• Votes on proposed action
• Majority ( 6 of 11) required for action
– Positive or negative
The Dean and Board
Positive Vote
• 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.
Negative Vote
• R&T sends letter to chair
– Outlining reasons for denial
• Must wait until next academic year
• Appeal process
– Chair submits significant new information
– Or appeals to committee in person
Tenure
• Available to faculty in traditional and
clinician/educator tracks
• Same criteria for both tracks, decision
separate from promotion decision
• Faculty must be VITAL to MCW missions
(clinical, education, research)
• Rarely given below rank of Professor
MCW = State schools
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
Tenure not granted at Assoc Prof
(is granted at State-Supported Universities)
Positive:
Negative:
Less financial obligation for MCW
Chance of obtaining tenure may be
lower
Portfolios
• Way to highlight achievements that are
not easy to depict in a CV
• No more than 10 single sided pages
• Should highlight “themes” of your career
Educator’s Portfolio
Overall Teaching Effectiveness (OTE) Ratings for Dr.
X Compared to Department Mean, 2001-2004,1-5
point scale, 1=outstanding
OTE Rating
2
1.5
My rating
Dept Mean
1
0.5
0
2001-2002
2002-2003
2003
2004
Educator’s Portfolio
Pass Rate on First Attempt,
American Board Certifying Examination,
1986-1989 Before my Leadership,
1990-1995 During my Leadership
100
Percent
80
60
40
20
0
MCW 1986-1989 MCW 1990-1995
ABP Mean
Portfolio Example for
New Track
Patients seen in Pulmonary Clinic
700
600
Sabbatical year
500
400
Patients seen
300
200
100
0
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
EP: Example
Percent pts receiving enteral feeds
100
Percent
80
Implementation of
protocol
60
% receiving
enteral feeds
40
20
0
ly
Ju
S
t
p
e
v
No
Month
Ja
n
M
c
ar
h
Promotion “DOs”
• Be prepared
– Plan early and review often
• Get input from colleagues, mentors,
chairs
• Just being here for a long time does not
warrant promotion
Promotion “DOs”
• 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 a portfolio
• Send your best publications
Promotion “DOs”
• Choose 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
• Include “wish list”
– Submitted publications, “approved but not
funded grants”
• Mix abstracts, chapters, papers
Promotion “DON’Ts”
• Ask for letters from “Harvard-types”
– 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
committee doesn’t look for reasons not
to promote
YES