Evaluation for Promotion with Tenure

Each university divisional executive committee shall establish written criteria and standards it will employ in recommending the granting of tenure.  These criteria and standards shall assure that the granting of tenure is based on evidence of (1) excellence in research ; (2) professional student teaching and graduate student teaching and mentoring; and (3) service to the university, to the faculty member’s profession, and/or professional service to the public.  Demonstration of excellence in research and either teaching or service is required for recommending the granting of tenure.

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.

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
      The candidate should have demonstrated the ability to conduct research that reflects original scholarship and contributes to knowledge.  This ability may be demonstrated in one or more of the following ways: (1) conducting research with appropriate methods and rigor; (2) conceptualizing and theorizing in an original way; (3) synthesizing, critically analyzing, and clarifying extant knowledge and research; (4) developing innovative methods for conducting scholarly inquiry; or (5) conducting research related to the solution of practical problems of individuals, groups, organizations, or societies.  Evidence of research performance and of a candidate’s standing in a discipline can be varied; the case must be made for the quality and contribution of the present and future work.
   2. 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 6^th year of the probationary period.
   3. Research Funding
      Faculty are expected to seek extra­mural funding 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.
      
      

      Standards for Research Excellence in the Discipline

      Research excellence in Social and Administrative Sciences in Pharmacy typically and predominantly is marked by scholarly productivity.   First and foremost, the evidence is publications in peer-reviewed journals with a consistent chronology and with a substantial number of first and co-authored articles.  Social and Administrative Pharmacy is an applied discipline, thus, publication vehicles are pharmacy-based and non-pharmacy-based journals.  Research that is important to a broader audience can appear in broader health services journals, and, consistent with scientific scholarship overall, higher quality research generally appears in higher impact journals.  During a probationary period about 15 or more publications in peer-reviewed journals is a good level of productivity.

      A second marker of research excellence in the discipline is presentations (abstracts), particularly at local, national and/or international meetings.  Due to the applied nature of the discipline national pharmacy and non-pharmacy-based association meetings provide an accessible and appropriate forum for scientists.  Research with sufficient importance to non-pharmacy association meetings also are an appropriate forum for presentations (abstracts).  Invited podia or keynote addresses are most reflective of research excellence in this domain, but it is uncommon for novice researchers to have established a publication and contributed presentation track record that would represent sufficient expertise to be an invited, high profile speaker.  Annual first-authored and co-authored poster and podium presentations reflect an ongoing, developing research program.  These activities can present evidence of excellence, especially where peer review screening and acceptance for contributed presentations occurs.

      A final marker of research excellence is evidence of successful funding for a research program.  Securing extramural federal funding, although highly valued, is difficult to secure in our very applied discipline.  Securing funding from other sources is an additional potential marker of research excellence, following the assumption that funders invest in good research questions and methods.  As such, this marker is lowest in importance.

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. The candidate should have demonstrated effective teaching abilities.  The following should be evident in the record: commitment to teaching, success in communicating material, and stimulation of learner interest.
   4. Forms of Evaluation
      1. Yearly Student Evaluations
         The School of Pharmacy student evaluation process should be used to obtain student evaluations of teaching.  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 should attend a representative number of teaching sessions led by the candidate.  A person with recognized teaching expertise may attend and evaluate teaching sessions led 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.
         
         

         Standards for Excellence in Teaching in the Discipline

         If teaching is one of the candidate’s areas of excellence, evidence must be presented that the candidate has developed and/or demonstrated excellence in teaching.

         Examples of excellence in teaching will likely include:

         • Being first, corresponding, or co-author on peer-reviewed articles related to teaching
         • Exceeding required teaching load expectations during the probationary period
         • Development of a new curriculum, course (didactic or experiential), seminar, or workshop in undergraduate, graduate, or continuing pharmacy education
         • Creation of novel or unique teaching methodologies or tools
         • Establishment of a community program or partnership to further health or medical education
         • Creation and evaluation of novel teaching/learning evaluation method or tool
         • Invitations to teach at conferences or continuing education programs
         • Presentation of teaching innovations at national or international educational meetings
         • Evidence of sustained efforts to obtain intra- or extramural funding for research related to didactic or experiential teaching
         • Fellowship in the University of Wisconsin Teaching Academy
         • Appointment to editorial board of teaching-focused professional journals
         • Teaching awards
         • Awards for teaching or research received by graduate students mentored by the candidate
         • Student evaluations of teaching that improve over time and/or are at or above values for divisional and/or School of Pharmacy faculty
         • Peer evaluations of teaching that improve over time and/or suggest excellence in teaching
         • Serving as a referee/reviewer for teaching-focused journals and/or scientific conferences within one’s discipline
           
           
5. Evaluation of Service
   Service activities fall into three general categories: 1) service to the public; 2) service to the university, School of Pharmacy, and their division; and 3) 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.  All service activities must be adequately documented.
   
   
   1. 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.
         
         
   2. Service to Outside Organizations and Agencies
      Junior faculty should be selective in accepting invitations to participate in outside service activities.  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.
      
      

      Standards for Excellence in Service in the Discipline

      If service is one of the candidate’s areas of excellence, evidence must be presented that the candidate has developed and/or demonstrated excellence in service.  Committee membership, professional service and administrative duties are expected of all SAS faculty, and routine activities in this area do not meet the criteria for excellence as a basis for promotion.

      Examples of excellence in service will likely include:

      • Leadership roles in professional (professional, academic, or scientific) service organizations.
      • Leadership roles in School of Pharmacy or university committees.
      • Professional leadership in local, state, regional, or national service or governmental units
      • Present and past appointments or election to office in regional, or national pharmacy and health care/scientific societies or advisory boards
      • Appointments to local, national, and international grant review committees
      • The creation or development of a program deemed critical by the School of Pharmacy
      • Presentation of leadership innovations at national or international educational meetings
      • Being first, senior, or co-author on peer-reviewed articles related to academic administration, leadership, or program development
      • Serving as a referee/reviewer for journals and/or scientific conference within one’s discipline
        
        
6. Outside Review of Research, Teaching and Service
   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.