Faculty & Staff Resources
Resources for SOP Faculty and Staff

I. Evaluation for Promotion

  1. All processes and criteria used by the Departmental Executive Committee must be consistent with its written guidelines and policies, as well as with those developed by each appropriate University Divisional Committee for Tenure or Indefinite Status.
  2. The Departmental Executive Committee should examine closely the details of procedure for each indicator of quality used in the evaluation.
  3. Evaluation of Scholarly Activity
    1. Research Publications
      A sufficient number of publications in peer – reviewed journals and other forms of publication should be available at the time of review to allow an evaluation of the quality of scholarship to be carried out and of the long – term potential for sustained growth and impact of this research. Where collaborative work is conducted, the contributions of the various authors should be identified. As evidence of a sustained publication effort is desirable, it is expected that data will have been published expeditiously as studies were completed and not retained for a burst of publication activity in the 6th year of the probationary period.
    2. Outside Review
      Letters of evaluation sent to a broader audience must be worded in such a way so as to specifically obtain judgement of criteria deemed important by the Departmental Executive Committee and the University Divisional Committee. Indication of the accomplishments and stature of the peer reviewers is required in considering such responses. Efforts should be made also to seek comment from peers working outside of any school of pharmacy faculty. The writers of the letters of evaluation should be at arms – length from the candidate. The minimum letters required is determined by what the appropriate University Divisional Committee at the time of promotion determine to be adequate.
    3. Research Funding
      Faculty are expected to vigorously seek extramural funding (e.g., NIH or NSF) to support their research programs. It is important to assess the extent to which support of certain funding agencies reflects outstanding peer-group evaluation of research plans and potential.However, it is equally important to avoid automatically equating levels of funding of any type to levels of effort, productivity, and quality.
    4. Citations
      Clearly, if the independent research of a junior faculty member has sufficient impact to result in a significant number of positive citations, as reflected by references in Citations Index, this type of evaluation should be used. However, given the short time between appointment and when evaluation takes place, the lack of citations should not be taken to indicate anything negative about the candidate, particularly when all other measurements indicate excellent potential for the future. Such “impact” evaluations would seem more appropriate for consideration of promotion to full professor. Note that all publications should include the impact factor of the journal if required by the current university divisional committees.

  4. Evaluation of Teaching
    1. Attentiveness to teaching is to be expected from our faculty; every effort should be made to seriously evaluate their commitment to good teaching. This should be expressed as an expectation from the beginning.
    2. In the case where teaching is to be given the highest priority in the promotion of a faculty member, the individual must demonstrate unique qualities, extra effort, and distinctive accomplishment as judged by broad recognition on a national level.
    3. Forms of Evaluation
      1. Yearly Student Evaluations – It would be appropriate to  have one uniform evaluation document for all junior  faculty within a school division or, better yet, within the entire School of Pharmacy. This would allow us to establish some measure of relative performance as  judged by the same student population. Questions should be directed to teaching skills and effort rather than to the student’s perception of what was or was not important as far as subject matter, emphasis, etc.
      2. Yearly Peer Evaluation

        (1) Attending class
        (2) Review of teaching materials

        Members of the candidate’s school division and of the Departmental Executive Committee review committee should attend a representative number of teaching sessions handled by the candidate. A written report on each occasion should be prepared. Selected general criteria upon which to base a review should be provided to reviewers. A review of teaching materials should be designed to  focus on the effort being made, the level of up-to-date information being provided, and any indication of innovative pedagogical approaches  being used. Each individual’s style and approach to teaching should be respected as long as positive results are demonstrated with an appropriate level
        of fairness.
  5. Evaluation of Service
    The service component of academic responsibility can be divided into at least two major parts: (1) service to the university, School of Pharmacy, and their Division; and (2) service to the profession of Pharmacy, to professional organizations and to governmental agencies.

    There is a tendency to “protect” junior faculty from involvement in “service” activities and, in general, not to include some type of critical evaluation of the quality of effort made in carrying out various “service” functions. Although it is understandable why such involvement should be kept to a minimum, there is a danger that habits of poor institutional citizenship and service to the broader scholarly, professional,  and societal communities can be ingrained to the eventual detriment of all concerned. Thus, we recommend the following.
  6. Service to the university
    1. Junior faculty should be expected to attend School of Pharmacy faculty meetings, as well as those called for by the school division chairperson.
    2. Faculty should be expected to actively meet their responsibilities with committee appointments within the School and University. Possible over-involvement in committee work, to the detriment of other academic duties, must be monitored by the school division chairperson and Dean, but active interest in limited assignments must be encouraged and expected.
    3. Service to Outside Organizations and Agencies Junior faculty must be selective in accepting invitations to  participate in outside service activities selectively. Invitations  which reflect recognition of expertise and accomplishments of the faculty member by peer scholars should take precedence  over other types of organizational activities during the probationary period.
    Note: All documents should be submitted to the Executive Assistant to the Dean at least one week prior to the Executive Committee meeting for posting on the web.

    PSD: Faculty Appointments & Promotion