Educator Track

University of Miami Miller School of Medicine

1

Educator Track:

Represents a community of academic scholars with terminal degrees, physicians or non-physicians, who devote their major effort to educational activities including teaching, research in instructional methodology, and/or educational administration.

2

How are Criteria for Promotion and Tenure Established?

• Faculty Senate is responsible for the policies and procedures as outlined in the Faculty Manual (miami.edu/facultysenate)

• Requirements for faculty promotion and tenure in the Miller School of Medicine are determined by the Faculty Council (medicalcouncil.miami.edu)

3

What is the process?

4

Faculty member asks to be considered

Faculty member discussed with division chief or

department chair

Some departments have internal

advisory committee review

Packet prepared with outside letters,

Departmental Review and Vote

MSOM Appointment, Promotion, & Tenure (APT) Committee Reviews and Votes

Chair’s have opportunity for

appeal of negative or split APT votes

Dean reviews APT recommendation and

makes Dean’s recommendation

University Academic Personnel Board

(APB) Reviews and Votes

Provost Reviews Recommendations,

makes Final Decisions

University Board of Trustees Reviews and Makes Final

Decisions on Tenure

Evaluation of Merit:

A key is whether there has been significant and continuing growth, productivity and excellence in the activities relevant to the candidate’s track during the candidate’s time at his/her present rank.

5

Promotion from Assistant Professor to Associate Professor:

• Evidence outstanding teaching (i.e. teaching portfolios)• Evidence of creative instructional/research contributions• Evidence of continued professional growth• Requires a record of substantial success in both teaching and

scholarship (although in unusual cases an outstanding record in one of these activities and an adequate record in the other may be considered sufficient)

• Recognition within his/her referral area (local, regional, state)

6

Promotion from Associate Professor to Professor:

• Evidence outstanding teaching (i.e. teaching portfolios)• Evidence of creative instructional/research contributions• Evidence of continued professional growth• Requires a record of substantial success in both teaching and

scholarship (although in unusual cases an outstanding records in one of these activities and an adequate record in the other may be considered sufficient)

• National recognition in the area of medical education

7

Who Votes for What?

8

    TENURE TRACK                TENURE-EARNING TENURE RESEARCH CLINICAL EDUCATOR

ACTION TO/OFASST PROF

ASSOC PROF

ASSOC PROF PROF

ASST PROF

ASSOC PROF PROF

ASST PROF

ASSOC PROF PROF

Initial/Consultative Tenure-earning Asst Prof x x x x              Tenure-earning Assoc Prof x x x x              Award of Tenure Assoc Prof x x x x              Award of Tenure Prof x x x x                                     Research Asst Prof x x x x              Research Assoc Prof x x x x            

  Research Prof x x x x                                     Asst Prof of Clinical x x x x              Assoc Prof of Clinical x x x x              Prof of Clinical x x x x                                                          Appointment Tenure-earning Asst Prof     x x              Tenure-earning Assoc Prof     x x              Award of Tenure Assoc Prof     x x              Award of Tenure Prof       x                                     Research Asst Prof     x x              Research Assoc Prof     x x              Research Prof       x                                     Asst Prof of Clinical     x x              Assoc Prof of Clinical     x x              Prof of Clinical       x            

Who Votes for What?

9

    TENURE TRACK            

    TENURE-EARNING TENURE RESEARCH CLINICAL EDUCATOR

ACTION TO/OFASST PROF

ASSOC PROF

ASSOC PROF PROF

ASST PROF

ASSOC PROF PROF

ASST PROF

ASSOC PROF PROF

ReappointmentTenured Assoc Prof making progress toward Promotion to Prof       x            

                         Tenure-earning Asst Prof     x x              Tenure-earning Assoc Prof     x x                                     Research Asst Prof   x x x   x x        Research Assoc Prof     x x     x        Research Prof       x                                     Asst Prof of Clinical   x x x         x x  Assoc Prof of Clinical     x x           x  Prof of Clinical       x                                                          Promotion Assoc Prof (Tenure Track)     x x              Prof (Tenure Track)       x                                     Research Assoc Prof   x x x   x x        Research Prof       x     x                               Assoc Prof of Clinical   x x x         x x  Prof of Clinical       x           x                                              Award of Tenure Assoc Prof     x x              Prof       x            

Items Needed for Promotion File

The faculty member is responsible for:• Candidate’s Personal Statement/Career Assessment (2 pages)• Candidate’s current CV in Standard UM Format• Minimum of five external review letters (arm’s length)• Letters of acceptance for ‘in-press’ articles (as applicable)• Three publications (within last 5-7 years)• Educator Portfolio http://edo.med.miami.edu/the-educators-portfolio

The Department is responsible for:• DF-15 form (completed by department)• Chairman Recommendation Memo• Summary of Departmental APT Committee Vote• Teaching Evaluation (s)• Scholarly Material Review Certification

10

Getting Started: Seek Advice and Feedback from Others

• Meet with your chairman or division chief early in the process to gain his/her support and perspective

• Share materials with a colleague, preferably one who has already successful gone through the process, and who doesn’t know you or your area well to be sure it is clear and interpretable

11

Formatting Your Curriculum Vitae

• Follow the UM format, but use subcategory headings to organize the material to tell your story• Be precise:

– Consider using Summaries at beginning of CV Sections to give a snapshot of your work in each section (include categories applicable to your work). For example, for Publications:

• Number of Peer-reviewed publications• Number of Book Chapters• Number of Books as Author/Editor/Co-Editor• Number of Non-Peer-reviewed publications• Number First Author /Corresponding Author Publication• Number of Team Science publications • Total Citations of your work

– Number items; specifically your references/publications and clearly organize by type (e.g., peer-reviewed, book chapters, editorials)

– Be accurate in your references (committee members will check pub-med); Include PMID if available and applicable

– Clearly indicate Corresponding author (e.g. *) and T-Team Science (e.g., T) roles– Make your regional / national (for associate professor) and national / international (for professor)

activities, impact and recognition clear• Highlight invited national/international presentations, service on editorial boards,

participation/leadership of national (professional, NIH) committees and task forces)• Be concise: be conscious of committee member reader burden (they have lots to read)• Continually update your CV and materials• Link to UM Format: http://facultyaffairs.med.miami.edu/faculty-development-apt/cv-format

12

Personal Statement/Career Assessment

• Recommended length: 2-3 pages (2 is preferred)• Illustrate progressive advancement and impact: Tell your story, but do so concisely• Suggested outline:

– Paragraph 1 – Early career and roots in science and teaching– Paragraph 2 – Development of your particular expertise (in research, education,

administration, clinical care)– Paragraph 3 – Recognition of expertise by others (papers, panels, journal reviews, advisory

and editorial boards)– Paragraph 4 – Comment on other areas (e.g. teaching, administration, service)– Paragraph 5 – Vision for your future – how will you continue to grow, excel, and increase

scope of impact

13

External Reviewers

• You will be asked to provide 8-10 reviewer names that may be contacted by your Chair for a letter of evaluation. You are required to have 5 “arm’s length” letters for your promotion package.

• Reviewers should be:– academic leaders who can provide neutral expert opinions on your accomplishments,

stature, and potential for future success.– at a rank at least equal to that which you aspire. Letters from Senior Leaders in non-

academic institutions will be included in your file, but will NOT be considered as one of the core letters.

– neutral to you (should NOT be former mentors, preceptors, colleagues or collaborators).• Confidentiality is imperative. Once the reviewer list has been submitted, the candidate cannot

be informed as to who has responded or what response was received.• Faculty Affairs will email the solicitation requests, once approved by the candidate’s chairman,

unless the Department indicates that they will handle the solicitation process themselves. If this is the case, the Department is required to follow-up with Faculty Affairs and provide weekly updates.

• You may have letters of support from internal colleagues and/or collaborators at other institutions but they will not count towards the required 5 letters for your packet.

14

Guidelines for Determining “arm’s length” Reviewers:

Reviewer Qualifications Details

Is this reviewer a current or former mentor/mentee?

Former preceptors, thesis advisors, lab directors, or other industry experts that have had a role in your training and development are NOT considered arm’s-length. Former students, and/or post-graduate trainees are NOT considered arm’s-length.

Is the reviewer from your former institution and/or region?

In general, reviewers should NOT be from your former institution, regardless of professional relationship. Former faculty members, Chairs, Deans and/or colleagues who directly interacted with you in the course of your duties at your former institution(s) are NOT considered arm’s-length. Candidates should NOT list more than one reviewer from the same institution.

Is this reviewer a current or former supervisor?

Former lab directors, Chairs, Deans that directly supervised your duties and/or training at other institutions are NOT considered arm’s-length.

Is this reviewer a close collaborator?

If the reviewer has collaborated in a grant, published or been a co-applicant with you, within the last five years, the reviewer is NOT considered arm’s- length. Beyond that five year window, the reviewer may or may not be neutral depending on the nature of the relationship.

Is this reviewer a close personal friend or a relative?

If the reviewer has maintained a long-standing relationship that has extended beyond professional meetings or occasional communications, the reviewer is NOT considered arm’s-length.

15

General Timeline

Event Estimated Date

Survey Faculty January 2015

Initial document solicitation for candidates January/February 2015

Solicitation letters sent out March 2015

Responses from letters received April – end of May 2015

Document compilation for each file April – end of May 2015

Final receipt of documents from faculty and department End of May 2015

Departmental APT Committee Voting Meetings June – August 2015

Completed files to Faculty Affairs End of August 2015

SOM APT Committee File Review September – October 2015

SOM APT Committee Meeting End of October 2015

Dean’s review of files November 2015

Coral Gables Academic Personnel Board Meeting January – February 2016

Provost Review of files February – March 2016

Board of Trustees Review of Files April – May 2016

Results Announced (effective June 1, 2016) May 2016

16

Resources/Contacts

• Mitzi Wilkinson, Director, Faculty Affairs– mwilkinson@med.miami.edu; 305-243-6551

• Amanda Mesa, APT Coordinator– amesa@med.Miami.edu; 305-243-6551

• Faculty Affairs Website– www.facultyaffairs.med.miami.edu

17