Tenure-Earning Track University of Miami Miller School of Medicine 1.

Tenure-Earning Track

University of Miami Miller School of Medicine

1

Tenure-Earning Track:

Faculty members who demonstrate excellence in teaching and service and who strive to make significant and original contributions to the body of knowledge in their medical specialties or scientific disciplines.

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

Individual/Department

Miller School of Medicine

University

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:

• Must have attained national recognition• Evidence of scholarship supported by publications or similar

communications in at least one focus area• Teaching: evidence of having developed and/or conducted teaching

programs (classroom teaching, graduate-student teaching, clinical teaching)

• Research: evidence of major involvement in a research program that is of high quality and significance and is extramurally funded

• Clinical Activity: evidence of performing clinical responsibilities• Professional Service: evidence of service to Department, School,

hospital or University

6

Promotion from Associate Professor to Professor and Award of Tenure:

• Must have attained widespread recognition• Continued evidence of scholarship supported by publications or

similar communications in at least one focus area• Teaching: continued evidence of having developed and/or

conducted teaching programs (classroom teaching, graduate-student teaching, clinical teaching)

• Research: evidence of major involvement in a research program that is of high quality and significance and is extramurally funded

• Clinical Activity: evidence of performing clinical responsibilities• Professional Service: evidence of service to Department, School,

hospital or University

7

Timeline for Tenure

Year Event Comments

Year 1 Yearly Review

Year 2 Yearly Review

Year 3 Mid-Point ReviewMidpoint assesses progress towards tenure and occurs in the Fall of the third year. If not making progress, recommendation for terminal notice is made; if renewal, receive 3-year extension of appointment

Year 4 Terminal Year If not making progress, this is terminal year

Year 5 Mandatory Review

Mandatory Promotion Review occurs in the Fall of the fifth year. Assistant Professor must be promoted to Associate Professor to receive 2-year extension of appointment. Associate Professor is assessed for progress towards tenure. Promotion is effective June 1st of the sixth year.

Year 6 Terminal Year If Associate Professor is not making progress toward tenure or if Assistant Professor is not promoted, this is terminal year.

Year 7 Mandatory Tenure Review

Mandatory Tenure Review occurs in the Fall of the seventh year. If tenure is awarded, it is effective June 1st of the eighth year.

Year 8 Tenure Awarded If tenure is denied, this is terminal year

8

Voting Procedures

9

• All mid-point reviews require one vote• All promotions require one vote• All award of tenure reviews require one vote• Instances where a promotion and request for tenure are being considered at the same time,

there are two votes taken: one for promotion and one for tenure

Who Votes for What?

10

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?

11

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

Clock Dates for Tenure Review

12

Hire DateMid-Point

Review (3rd year)

Terminal Year

(4th Year)

Mandatory Review

(5th Year)

Promotion Effective(6th Year)

Terminal Year

(7th year)

Tenure Review

(8th year)

Tenure Effective(9th year)

Terminal Year

(10th year)

2008 Jan 2011 May 2012 Fall 2013 June 2014 May 2015 Fall 2015 June 2016 May 2017








Third Year Mid-Point Reviews (effective June 1st of fourth year)

Purpose is to assess progress towards tenure.

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 (optional) 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

13

Candidate file to include the following:

http://edo.med.miami.edu/the-educators-portfolio


Fifth Year Mandatory (Promotion) Review (effective June 1st of sixth year)

Assistant Professors must be promoted to Associate Professors in order to receive 2-year extension of appointment. Those already at Associate Professor rank are assessed for progress towards tenure.



14




Seventh Year Mandatory (Tenure) Review (effective June 1st of eighth year)

Purpose is to review for and grant award of tenure.



15




Formatting Your Curriculum Vitae

• Be precise:– Number items; specifically your references/publications– Follow guidelines for presentation of materials– Be accurate in your references (committee members will check pub-med)– Quantify first and last author roles

• Be concise: be conscious of committee member reader burden (they have lots to read)• Make your regional / national (for associate professor) and national / international (for professor)

activities, impact and recognition clear• Continually update your CV and materials• Link to UM Format: http://facultyaffairs.med.miami.edu/faculty-development-apt/cv-format

16

http://facultyaffairs.med.miami.edu/faculty-development-apt/cv-format

http://facultyaffairs.med.miami.edu/faculty-development-apt/cv-format

Personal Statement/Career Assessment

• Recommended length: 2-3 pages (2 is preferred)• Illustrate progressive advancement and impact• Suggested outline:

– Paragraph 1 – Early career and roots in academic medicine– 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

17

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.

• These reviewers should be academic leaders who can provide neutral expert opinions on your accomplishments, stature, and potential for future success.

• Evaluators should hold 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.

• External reviewers should be neutral to you and 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.

18

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.

19

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

20

Resources/Contacts

• Mitzi Wilkinson, Director, Faculty Affairs– [email protected]; 305-243-6551

• Amanda Mesa, APT Coordinator– [email protected]; 305-243-6551

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

21

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

Tenure-Earning Track University of Miami Miller School of Medicine 1.

Documents

Transcript of Tenure-Earning Track University of Miami Miller School of Medicine 1.