from tenure track to tenure: the view of the nih central tenure committee (ctc) nci-ccr...
Post on 12-Jan-2016
223 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
From Tenure Track to Tenure: The View of the NIH Central
Tenure Committee (CTC)
NCI-CCR Investigators RetreatJune 16, 2006by Arlyn Garcia-Perez, Ph.D.Assistant Director, OIR, OD, NIH andExecutive Secretary, NIH CTC
Summary 1994-2006 NIH Tenure-Track (TT) Cohorts
T – T
Cohorts
Total
TT
Tenured Still
on
TT
Left
TT
1994-1997 300 173
(58%)
13
(4%)
114
(38%)
1998-2006 328 53
(16%)
247
(75%)
28
(9%)
As of 6/5/2006
Summary 1994-2006 NCI-CCR TT Cohorts
T – T
Cohorts
Total
TT
Tenured Still
on
TT
Left
TT
1994-1997 69 31
(45%)
5
(7%)
33
(48%)
1998-2006 70 11
(16%)
53
(76%)
6
(8%)
As of 6/5/2006
Summary 1994-2006 CTC Actions
Years Total
Actions
Tenured Def.
Tenure
Denied
Tenure
1994-2006
NIH Total
369 330
(89%)
26
(7%)
13
(4%)
1994-2006
NCI-CCR
65 57
(88%)
6
(9%)
2
(3%)
As of 6/5/2006Of 26 deferred, 13 have been tenured
72% of all CTC actions have been on tenure-track cases
Recommending Memo from the Lab/Branch Chief or SD, through IC Director, specifically addressing the recommendation for tenure
The best memo should, at minimum: Contain an excellent description of the specific
and unique scientific contributions to the field(s) Address evidence of independence Address quality of science, productivity and
impact on specific field and biomedical research more generally
Address national / international recognition Address expected contributions after tenure
CV and bibliography
The CV should include, at minimum: The correct Intramural Professional Designation
(Investigator, if from the NIH tenure track) Evidence of independence – independent
contributions to research, including team research, as reflected by first-author and senior-author original papers, national & international invitations to speak, letters of reference, etc.
CV and bibliography (continued)
The CV should include, at minimum (continued): Evidence of productivity (evaluated relative to
resources) Evidence of recognition in the field(s) – awards,
honors, national & international invitations to speak, letters of reference, etc.
Evidence of mentorship abilities – trainees (postbac, grad student, postdoc) throughout the candidate’s tenure track and where these trainees are now
CV and bibliography (continued)
The CV should include, at minimum (continued): Evidence of good “citizenship” – e.g. IC or NIH-
wide committee active participation (e.g., NIH Special Interest Group, IRB, ACUC, Woman Scientist Advisor, etc.)
Attached should be: List of 5 most important publications Copies of 2 most significant papers Description of future plans by the scientist (no more
than 5 pages)
Board of Scientific Counselors’ Reports
Mid-point review (or first review as a tenure-track investigator)
Latest review (must be within the past 2 years when it arrives at OIR for CTC review)
Report of IC Promotion and Tenure Committee
Resources throughout the tenure track
A detailed description of the resources (budget, personnel, space, other) available to the candidate from the beginning of the tenure track to date, with a timeline of changes along the length of the tenure track. This should not be more than 1-2 pages long.
Letters of Recommendation(The weight of these letters and who they are from cannot be overstated)
Outgoing letter soliciting letters of recommendation (Sample from OIR). The outgoing letter must not have any reference to the evaluations of other committees, such as the BSC, regarding tenure for the candidate. Attachments to the solicitation must be limited to CV, bibliography, reprints and future plans, if desired
Letters of Recommendation(The weight of these letters and who they are from cannot be overstated)
List of all individuals (with title and contact information) from whom letters were solicited, denoting those who submitted a letter, those who declined, and those who did not respond
Avoid asking CTC members or other NIH Senior Investigators who may be called to serve as ad hoc reviewers – a letter immediately recuses that individual from the case
Letters of Recommendation(The weight of these letters and who they are from cannot be overstated)
An absolute minimum of 6 letters from non-collaborators
Top Reason for Denial of Tenure
Not meeting the standards of high quality, originality, innovation or impact of research on field
Top Reasons for Deferral of Tenure
50% of deferred cases ultimately receive tenure
Insufficient evidence of recognition as leader or up-and-coming leader in research field
Insufficient productivity (not only quantity, but quality and impact is considered) relative to resources and time on tenure track
Insufficient evidence of independent research effort
Insufficient letters from the leaders in the research field
Feel free to contact me with questions!!!
Arlyn Garcia-Perez, Ph.D.
Email: GarciaA@mail.nih.gov
Telephone: (301) 496-1381
top related