Faculty & Staff Resources
Resources for SOP Faculty and Staff

Promotion of CHS Track Faculty

Guidelines for Promotion or Appointment of CHS Track Faculty to Associate Professor (CHS) or Professor (CHS)

The purpose of these guidelines is to provide uniform criteria for promotion of CHS track faculty who hold appointment within the Pharmaceutical Sciences Division. Because it is not possible to provide precise criteria f or all potential promotions, the guidelines are intended to recognize the varied contributions of all candidates whose credentials are considered to be suitable and who contribute to the teaching, research, and service missions of the Pharmaceutical Sciences Division.

The promotional review begins when the candidate’s mentorship committee considers the candidate ready for promotion. For a candidate with 100% appointment, the review for promotion to Associate Professor (CHS) normally would occur no sooner than the fifth year and no later than the sixth year in rank at Assistant Professor (CHS). For a candidate with <100% appointment, the review for promotion to Associate Professor (CHS) normally would occur no sooner than the fifth year and no later than the final year of the probationary period described in the initial appointment letter. The review for promotion to Professor (CHS) normally would occur no sooner than the fifth year in rank at Associate Professor (CHS). The dean will appoint a promotion review committee who will conduct the review and submit a recommendation to the School of Pharmacy Executive Committee.

The recommendation dossier to the Executive Committee should include the following information:

  1. A letter from the promotion committee chair. The letter must include:
  2. The total number of years counted on the CHS promotion timetable at UW–Madison and elsewhere.
  3. Documentation of the responsibilities of the candidate, including the percentages of time allotted to teaching, research, and service.
  4. A description of the candidate’s area of excellence and areas of significant accomplishment, with supporting evidence (see Performance).
  5. Letters from non-School of Pharmacy reviewers who have evaluated the candidate’s performance as an assistant professor (CHS).
  6. Candidate’s curriculum vitae
  7. A statement of accomplishment written by the candidate

Performance

The candidate must demonstrate excellence in one area and significant accomplishment in at least one other areas of  endeavor, as outlined below. Promotion or appointment at the Associate Professor (CHS) level requires a candidate to demonstrate scholarly productivity and at least a national reputation for academic excellence. Promotion or appointment to Professor (CHS) requires continued scholarly productivity, and an expanded national or international reputation for academic excellence. External letters of evaluation must be submitted with the promotion package. Letters should be obtained from individuals recognized for excellence and achievement in their own right. The strongest cases are those in which clear  support can be demonstrated by external qualified evaluators.

Promotion to or appointment at rank of Associate Professor (CHS)

Teaching

If teaching is a major portion of the candidate’s application, evidence must be presented that the candidate has developed and/or conducted a unique or exceptional teaching program(s). The evaluation of teaching abilities should  include all aspects of the candidate’s teaching responsibilities

Documentation will include:

    1. Any teaching awards or external recognition of instructional prowess.
    2. Successful external funding supporting innovative teaching. Competitive grants provided by the university are included in this consideration.
    3. Candidate’s statement of teaching contributions, including a synopsis of teaching assignments.
    4. Evidence of creativity and scholarship in teaching that should include publications in peer-reviewed journals, book chapters, or book editorship. Corresponding authorship of journal publications is preferred. Invited authorship is weighted appropriately.
    5. Divisional and other peer evaluation of teaching abilities. Examples of instructional materials, such as handouts used in the candidate’s teaching, are helpful and may be provided. Description of application of new or improved teaching methods should be provided as appropriate. If teaching is the candidate’s area of excellence, include at least one letter from outside the institution that establishes the candidate’s reputation for teaching excellence.
    6. Evaluations of teaching by students. Provide a summary of all teaching evaluations, including written comments. Individual evaluations must be available if requested but may not be substituted for the summary statement.
    7. Evaluations from residents, post-doctoral fellows, and graduate students, as appropriate.
    8. Leadership in regional or national teaching organizations.
    9. Invited participation on editorial review boards or instructional grant review panels.

Research

If research is a major portion of the candidate’s application, evidence must be presented that the candidate has major involvement in a research program (fundamental, applied, or combined) that is of high quality and significance. Documentation will include:

    1. A statement from the candidate that provides a description of the research program, accomplishments, and future goals.
    2. Letters of evaluation of the research program, solicited from recognized authorities in the candidate’s own field. Letters should assess the quality and productivity of the candidate’s research. If letters are provided as documentation of clinical, teaching and service excellence, include comments on research productivity, they can provide documentation in this category.
    3. Bibliography of publications resulting from this research. The candidate should describe his/her role in each publication. (Include copies of the candidate’s most noteworthy publications.) Corresponding authorship represents the clearest recognition of the faculty member’s role. It is expected that the successful candidate for promotion in the CHS track will be consistently publishing in high-quality, peer-reviewed journals.
    4. Chronology of present and pa st research support, including summary peer-review statements from funded and un-funded federal or non-federal research support applications.
    5. Invited lectures at professional or scientific meetings or at peer institutions.
    6. Invited participation on scientific / granting review panels.
    7. Reviewer or editorial board membership for a research-focused professional or scientific journal.

Service

If service is a major focus of the application for promotion, evidence must be provided to document a scholarly approach to truly exceptional service that has furthered the academic mission of the School of Pharmacy or the profession.

Committee membership, professional service, participation in Health Sciences Extension Programs, and administrative duties are expected of all faculty members.

Documentation of excellence or significant accomplishment will include:

    1. Candidate’s statement of service that has contributed to significant program development.
    2. Evidence of exceptional institutional or professional leadership, such as:
      1. Major divisional, School of Pharmacy, or university leadership roles, including roles on major committees. List present and past leadership activities, describing role, time commitment, and product.
      2. Professional leadership in local, state, or regional governmental units. List present and past public service activities, describing role and time commitment. The significant contribution of these activities to the academic mission of the School of Pharmacy must be documented.
      3. Present and past appointments or election to office in state or national professional societies, and the significant accomplishments of the candidate in these roles.
      4. Service as a reviewer of grant or protocol proposals at a national level.
    3. Major institutional program development (creation or development of a major scholarly program). Candidates who have created or developed a major scholarly program deemed critical by the School of Pharmacy should provide evidence of their contribution to the program. Documentation will include:
      1. Identification of the program and its role and significant contributions to the overall mission of the division and the School of Pharmacy. Provide evidence of the academic importance of the program to the School of Pharmacy and/or the region or nation. Provide evidence of growth and continued vitality of the program, and if available, ad hoc reviews of the program.
      2. Synopsis of the candidate’s personal contribution to the creation and development of the program.
      3. Evidence of the candidate’s scholarly approach to the program.
    4. Evidence of excellence and significant accomplishment in outreach/extension.
      1. Documentation that the candidate has designed and implemented programs that are innovative and of high quality.
      2. Evidence that these programs have had a favorable impact.
      3. Successful outreach/extension activities have been published.
    5. An exceptional record of service as journal or book editor, member of editorial boards, or manuscript reviewer.

Indefinite Appointment

Candidates who are promoted to the rank of Associate Professor (CHS) will normally be recommended for indefinite appointment status. See UW–Madison Academic Staff Policies and Procedures.

Appeal Process

If the Executive Committee recommends against promotion, the dean will provide written notification to the candidate within one week. The notification shall include a statement of the reasons for the Executive Committee decision and will guarantee a minimum of at least 12 additional months of employment before termination. The candidate may file an appeal to the Executive Committee with new or additional information and with a response to the concerns raised by the Committee. An appeal must be filed within 30 days of receipt of the notification of the Executive Committee’s decision. In the event the appeal is not accepted by the Executive Committee, the candidate may continue the appeal process according to the University of Wisconsin–Madison Academic Staff Policies and Procedures (ASPP).

Promotion to or appointment at rank of Professor (CHS)

The document should follow the same format described for promotion or appointment to Associate Professor (CHS). In addition, documentation must include evidence that the candidate has continued to grow in stature in the performance areas cited above or other evidence demonstrating professional growth and achievement commensurate with the rank of Professor (CHS). Documentation must be provided of further accomplishment since the initial appointment or promotion to Associate Professor (CHS). Typically, an Associate Professor can be promoted to Full Professor based on excellence in one area and significant accomplishment is a second area of the following, Research, Teaching, and Service. The areas of excellence and significant accomplishment may be the same or different from the areas evaluated for promotion from Assistant to Associate Professor. Typically, a time period of at least four years, from the time of being granted tenure, needs to have passed before consideration to promotion to Full Professor. Before a candidate will be considered for promotion to Full Professor by the Executive Committee, the candidate will first be discussed by the current Full Professors in the Pharmaceutical Sciences Division to advise if they should be considered for promotion. Typically, a committee is composed of the division chair and one other tenured full professor from the division and is formed to prepare a presentation to the full professors of the division in which the faculty member provides a dossier for review.

If the Associate Professor decides to seek promotion after being advised by the Full Professors in the Pharmaceutical Sciences Division, the dossier and selected manuscripts may be sent for review by outside letter writers. A request for outside letters is optional and the decision to make this optional request will be made by the candidate for promotion. After the dossier is complete and the letters are received (if applicable), the candidate should be brought forth to the Executive Committee for approval. The candidate’s dossier, letters, student and peer teaching evaluations, and committee summary are provided to the Executive Committee one week prior to the meeting. Typically, the chair of the committee makes the presentation to the Executive Committee. A recommendation to promote to the rank of professor is forwarded to the Dean’s office following an affirmative recommendation by a majority of the full professors on the Executive Committee.

PSD: Faculty Appointments & Promotion