Overview of Faculty and Promotions (FAP) Committee at Boston University School of Medicine
description
Transcript of Overview of Faculty and Promotions (FAP) Committee at Boston University School of Medicine
Overview of Faculty and Promotions (FAP) Committee at
Boston University School of Medicine
Kitt Shaffer, MD PhD FACRProfessor of Radiology, BUSM
Vice-Chair for Education in RadiologyChair, FAP Committee
topics• committee (members, procedures)• common issues leading to denial• outcomes over recent years
–detailed data for 2011
committee• administration
–Trang TranManager of Faculty ActionsOffice of the Dean and Provost, BUSM
committee• Chair, Kitt Shaffer MD PhD
FACR, Prof Radiology– since January 2012
• Vice-Chair, Harold Lazar MD, Professor Surgery– since January 2012
committee• Chair, Kitt Shaffer MD PhD FACR, Professor Radiology• Vice-Chair, Harold Lazar MD, Professor Surgery• Christopher Akey PhD, Professor Physiol/Biophysics• Karen Antman MD, Provost and Dean• Emelia Benjamin MD, Professor Medicine (Jan ’13)• James Feldman MD, Professr Emergency Medicine• Susan Fisher PhD, Professor of Microbiology• Richard Saitz MD, Professor Medicine/Epidemiology• Bob Stern PhD, Professor Neurology (starting Jan 2013)• Jennifer Vasterling, PhD, Professor Psychiatry, VA (Jan ’13)
procedures
• FAP meets 1st Thursday monthly• files are due ~ 3 weeks prior to meeting• Trang distributes agenda, links to files• all committee members can access files• Chair reviews ALL files
Appointment & Promotions procedures
• Associate or Professors presented in detail by one assigned committee member, discussed by group
• Assistant and Instructor approved without discussion unless issues raised
• Votes are recorded
promotions-recent changes• 1/1/12 new review procedure • “All faculty appointments shall be approved by the
President and reported to the Corporation”– As before, President Brown delegated to the
BUMC Provost the approval of:• modified titles (Adjunct, Clinical, Emeritus, Visiting)
• Instructors, Assistant Professors– increased need for internal diligence,
adherence to criteria
promotions-recent changes• reporting to Corporation
– new photo coversheet for each appointment– Deans letter summarizes pros and cons for each– “transparent, thorough, meaningful information” for
Academic Affairs Committee, Board of Trustees– biannual distribution of records to AAC, Trustees– annual reporting to AAC and Trustees
• goal: Improving Faculty Quality
titlesInstructor Asst Professor Assoc Professor Professor
entry level- many new hires
some new hires mid-career advanced career
no reputation local reputation national reputation international or widespread national reputation
academic potential
initial academic accomplishments
moving from mentee to mentor
extensive mentoring
publications +/- some publications
solid publications(includes published curricula if educator)
extensive publications, mostly senior author
presentations +/-
some presentations
national committees and presentations
international presentations, chairing national committees
gen no grants grants +/- some grants for scientist tracks
more grants for scientist tracks
other titles
• Clinical– primarily practice instruction, clinical
teaching– May be voluntary (not paid by BU or
affiliates)– often preceptors for clinical sites– generally no/little scholarly activity
other titles
• Research– scientists and scholars supported primarily by
other faculty’s grants– working for another PI, NOT an independent PI– generally not involved in medical or graduate
student teaching or administration
other titles
• Adjunct–person with primary academic
appointment at another institution–may also have other prefixes (Clinical,
Research)
other titles
• Emeritus– honor and esteem for past service– intent to continue collegial relationships
after retirement– 10 years of service– must be voted by department faculty
Reference Letters
Rank Total number
from non-BU faculty
Instructor 3Assistant Professor 3Associate Professor (± Clinical) 6 3
Professor (± Clinical) 6 4
letters• should focus on qualifications, reputation• ‘arm’s length’
• unbiased opinion of value of contributions• NOT from collaborators• from respected university or program• rank at least as high as promotion sought
organization of CV
Use BU format-- http://www.bumc.bu.edu/provost/ap/appforms/
Remove filler!! Sample items are included to demonstrate the proper
format and should be deleted before saving the final CV.
Delete sections in which applicant has no entries.
organization of CV• bibliography
– Consistent, and list all authors (no et al)
–boldface name–chronological, number items–do not include items that are ‘submitted’
or ‘under review’.–accepted for publication (in press) is ok
organization of CV• Presentations
– organize by date and year, number items– include location and venue as well as title
• Awards– Provide title of the award and group presenting
the award. Assume the reader knows nothing, give details
• Mentorship– list not only WHO but where they are now
Data*2011 was
LCME preparation
type level AY 2012 AY 2011 AY 2010 Initial Professor 5 11 9
Associate 11 28 14Assistant 87 139 90Instructor 63 230 71
TOTAL 166 *408 184Promotion Professor 8 21 12
Associate 14 26 20Assistant 23 23 20Instructor 1 0 0
TOTAL 46 *70 52Tabled 6 8
Denied 8 (3%) 5 (1%) 5 (2%)Approved 212 471 231TOTAL 226 *484 236
Details: promotion Assistant Professor
since 1/12- all approved
years @ rank
mentees articles pres pres int’l
pres nat’l
grants
3 0 0 0 0 0 04 0 1 11 0 0 0
17 0 1 14 0 2 02 0 2 0 0 0 07 0 2 0 2 12 05 0 3 0 0 0 02 0 3 8 0 0 02 0 3 8 0 0 02 0 5 2 0 0 03 0 7 0 0 0 01 0 28 0 0 0 05 19 42 0 0 0 04 1 8 4 - 1 -AVG
Details, all
Assoc Prof since 1/12
years@ rank
mentees articles pres grants outcome
initial 15 25 0 0 approved
initial 6 25 1 2 approved
3 54 23 17 5 approved
12 3 **10 5 0 approved
7 10 +10 23 2 approved
8 4 ++11 0 11 approved
2 13 *0 20 0 approved
5 0 16 0 10 tabled
5 2 11 26 4 denied
8 0 12 0 0 denied
11 4 7 28 0 denied
5 15 20 14 -
* 39 curricula
AVG (approved)
** 12 chapters
+Associate Ed, Journal++Many nat’lcommittees
Details, promotion Professor since 1/12
time @ rank
mentees articles pres pres int’l
pres nat’l
grants outcome
10 17 94 144 21 83 22 approved
7 25 62 127 30 41 26 approved
1 20 47 20 1 17 15 approved
9 25 44 52 0 0 7 approved
8 12 39 6 0 0 9 approved
7 13 16 42 1 15 0 denied
13 5 16 18 1 3 0 denied
7 20 57 96 10 28 16AVG(approved)
Recent denials• insufficient publications: average for
– Associate ~ 25, range 16-36– Professor ~ 70, range 39-118
• insufficient scope of reputation– regional/national for Associate– national/international for Professor
Other issues• insufficient grant documentation
– amounts, role– should name PI for each grant
• issues with letters– only from friends, collaborators
• inappropriate addition of “Clinical”– only for those without teaching,
administrative, or research potential
What if promotion is denied?
FAP Chair calls or meets with Department chair •Discusses reasons for denial
– options for faculty for future– provide advice on any insufficient documentation
questions?