The Whys and Hows of Academic Promotion FeiFei

The Why’s and How’s of Academic Promotion Fei-Fei Liu Shun Wong Drew Loblaw Rebecca Wong

Outline • • Academic promotion – why The promotion process From the candidate’s perspective In front of the decanal promotions committee

Purpose Ø Academic promotion is a mechanism by which the University recognizes notable achievements of their faculty in contributing to the mission of the University Ø Vision of the Faculty of Medicine: “International leadership in improving health through innovation in research and education” Ø Vision of UTDRO is: “Global leadership in Radiation Oncology by transforming practice through innovation and excellence in research and education. ” 3

Domains Ø Four domains: o research o education/teaching o creative professional activity (CPA) o leadership/administration Ø Recognition granted based on exceling in a specific aspect of academic activity Ø Not granted based solely on length of service 4

Philosophy ØGreatest weight given to excellence in scholarly achievement Ø Research/CPA (wide reputation; deep engagement) Ø And effective teacher Ø Associate: national reputation; Full: international reputation ØExcellence in teaching alone – needs to be sustained x 10 yrs ØAdministration (or other university services) alone – given less weight 5

UT-DRO Faculty Oncology Physics Therapy Other Total Instructor 0 0 11 Lecturer 11 6 15 2 34 Assistant 36 32 8 3 79 Associate 16 6 2 0 24 Professor 19 3 0 2 24 Total 82 47 36 7 172

Radiation Oncology Medical Physics Radiation Therapy Others

Overall Objective Ø Shift the curve to increase number of Associate and Full Prof’s in UTDRO Info session Ø Mentorship Ø Define expectations Ø 3 -year reviews Ø Ø Achieving our vision of “Global leadership in Radiation Oncology by transforming practice through innovation and excellence in research and education. ” 8

Leave Your Mark: C 4 Mural Project welcomed guests by encouraging them to add some art to a canvas banner. ELLICSR celebrated National Cancer Survivors Day Monday, June 10 9

Appointments • Initial appointment is generally for three years. • Following a successful performance review, faculty member is given a continuing annual appointment which can only be terminated for cause. 10

“Promotion” from Lecturer to Assistant Professor • Appointment from lecturer to assistant professor is NOT a promotion. It is a new appointment • Application reviewed by Departmental Appointment Committee, advisory to Chair • Chair submitted recommendation to Dean for approval. • Process does not go through Departmental Promotion Committee and Decanal Promotion Committee. 11

Timeline • Mar: Membership of DPC established • May: Review of CV of all Assistant & Associate Prof • Jul: 1 st Review of Promotion Dossiers by DPC • Sep: 2 nd Review of Promotion Dossiers by DPC, names of referees • Nov/Dec: Final Review of Promotion Dossiers including referee letters • Jan (deadline): Submission of materials to Decanal Promotion Committee 12

Do’s #1 • Update CV • Speak to your Department Chief and/or Chair DPC 13

Do’s #2 1. Faculty appointments & promotions Website: www. facmed. utoronto. ca/staff/appointment. htm 2. Read the Manual for Academic Promotion 14

Do’s #3 • Start WORKING on your CPA and teaching dossier • Go through CV, CPA and teaching dossier of recently successful candidates. • Speak to your Department Chief and/or Chair DPC re potential referees 15

Don’ts #1: CV • • • Manuscripts in preparation Awards won by your students, residents, fellows Awards nominated but not won Presentations your students/colleagues made Appropriate use of 5 most significant publications, select journals with high IPs • Typos 16

CPA • CPA: – 1. Professional innovation & creative excellence – 2. contributions to development of professional practice – 3. exemplary professional practice • Contributions to at least one of these elements • Criteria: – 1. Creative – 2. Documented – 3. Impact established 17

CPA dossier • 1. Intro, CPA themes (2 -3 typically) to support at least one of 3 CPA elements • 2. Description: must describe creative elements and impact on professional practice • 3. Documentation: – Grants, contracts, clinical trials, patents – Publications-peer-reviewed & non-peer-reviewed journal articles, books & book chapters – Presentations: local, national, international – Teaching – Clinical supervision/education – Administrative 18

Theme 1: Treatment guidelines and management of brain metastases CPA element of “Contributions to development of professional practice” Creative: theme including meta-analysis, critical evaluation and pooling of outcomes etc. . CPA has helped define new standard evidence-based radiation practice Impact: publications of peer-reviewed articles, systemic reviews, book chapters, presentations, teaching, leadership administrative activities Documentation: Tabulated SUMMARY, APPENDICES 19

Don’ts #2: CPA • Failure to document – 1. evidence for national & international reputation – 2. creative elements – 3. impact on professional practice • 2 -3 themes NOT 5 -6 themes • Broad CPA themes 20

Don’ts #3: teaching dossier • Description of teaching activities only • Need to demonstrate teaching effectiveness and/or excellence • Teaching evaluations • Teaching letters • Notes of thanks 21

Hope Beyond the Fall IJROBP v 87, Issue 2 “This painting is inspired by the extraordinary strength and hope of my patients and their families in the face of adversity, loss and grief” - Caroline Chung 22

Promotion Pearls Web CV • Web CV is your friend – Document papers, abstracts, grants, presentations, teaching as you do it – Always easier to edit down the extraneous work rather than add it in later • Try to identify CPA themes early (and prioritize around these) – The vast majority of your academic work should be aligned with one or both of your CPA themes 23

Promotion Pearls Manuscripts • Manuscripts much more important than (repeat) abstracts – It takes almost as much work to prepare abstract as a manuscript • Aim high for manuscript – Being able to address hard reviewers’ comments will make you a better manuscript and grant writer • Don’t be discouraged by rejections – Reviewers are busy and often don’t read paper thoroughly – Quickly move on to “plan B” (1 week to resubmit) – Plan C: peer-reviewed, pay-for-publication journals 24

Promotion Pearls Teaching • Be enthusiastic about subject matter – If you’re excited / interested / engaged, so will your student • Try and be relevant / value-added to student – Why are they doing the rotation? – How can you help them? • Document student rotations in Web CV as they occur • File / scan + save all evaluations in one promotion folder (preferably network folder) • Be open to invitations to visit other centres (industry partners often willing to sponsor) 25

Promotion Pearls Process Before Promotion: • Build relationships with potential referees • Social networking (conferences, Linked. In, Twitter) During Promotion: • Need to manage your commitments during promotion year • Often you’ll be asked to revise various parts of your application on short notice • Don’t get frustrated 26

27

Criteria for promotion • The successful candidate for promotion will be expected to have established a wide reputation in his or her field of interest, to be deeply engaged in scholarly work, and to show him or her self to be an effective teacher. • However, either excellent teaching alone or excellent scholarship alone, sustained over many years, could also in itself justify eventual promotion to the rank of professor. • Administrative activities…. Promotion will not be based primarily on such service. q. Research q. CPA q. Teaching • Excellence in at least one (commonly 2) and competence in others • If excellence in teaching alone – waiver for external review 28

Features of a strong dossier • EXCELLENCE • IMPACT • NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL • SUSTAINED 29

• Building a picture – CV – objective items (free from interpretive language by the candidate and referees) – Chair’s letter – External reference letters (source of bias, analytical letters expected, negative language is taken quite seriously) • Royal college examiner ✔ – Rest of the dossier 30

The decanal promotions committee • Multidisciplinary team – Chair, lab scientists/ clinicians – Provostial assessor (re process) – Administrator • • Rank of Professor Appointed by the dean (3 year term) Chair – Avrum Gotlieb Advisory to the dean 31

The evaluation process Guiding principles • Promotions manual • Other guidance/benchmarks – Training session by chair – Peer expectation – Group discussions establish soft criteria • For resubmissions: each application is viewed independently • Time reaching excellence is not that important 32

The evaluation process • CV distributed using microfiche • Each candidate reviewed in detail by 2 committee member (approx 10 dossier to review) • 2 day meeting + 1 deferral date • On day of review – Assigned reviewers • Comment/summarize strength/weaknesses, state recommendation – committee at large • Review pertinent information from microfiche • Discuss – Vote • promote/defer 33

Letters • Chairs, External, Internal, Students, Teaching effectiveness cmt • External letters – individuals of appropriate stature (professors) who are able to judge the quality and impact of the candidate’s work – Not collaborators • Internal letters – from within U of T, usually not from same dept • Chairs letter – very important 34

From the evaluator’s perspective • A lot of information to go through • Question – Has the candidate provided sufficient evidence that (s)he has demonstrated sustained excellence national/internationally in the proposed (research, CPA, education) area – Has the candidate provided sufficient evidence that (s)he has demonstrated competent in the other areas • Evidence – Objective (e. g. amount of grant money as PI from CIHR) – Interpretive (e. g. grant money as co. I from xxx foundation) – Consistency/style of presentation influence interpretation 35

Examples of deferral statements The committee. . § requests additional evidence of excellence in CPA § found the candidate’s dossier provided inadequate evidence of national impact of the work and invites additional information § noted a gap in productivity and asks for clarification § requests any additional information regarding new publications or submissions 36

Padding a CV • Seeks promotion to associate professor, last promoted 8 yrs ago • CPA: – implementing new treatment technique in the region, teaching technique • Research: – 10 publications since last promotion as 2 as SRA. 5 in journal she is associate editor. – Cite 5 small industry grants – Cite 1 collaborative grant, but she is not named as co. I • Teaching: – cite multiple medical students but no teaching scores • One internal letter not complimentary about technique • External letters credentials unclear (no letterhead), excellent colleague, worked together • Discussion – Unclear citations are legitimate – Unclear science in technical implementation is strong – Unclear there is national impact • Deferral – Request new letters, request evidence of national impact, teaching scores 37

The star researcher • Request for promotion to associate • Last promoted 5 years ago • Excellence (star) in research – Steady grants every 1 -2 yrs as PI – Million dollar peer reviewed grant PI – Publications 19 since last publication, 10 as PI, SRA • CPA parallels research themes • Excellent chairs letter/external letters • Discussion – Agreed excellence in research/CPA – No teaching scores, student letters – deferral • Deferral – Request for evidence of teaching competency 38

Things to start collecting (not typically in your CV) – On Teaching quality • File any teaching evaluations from your invited lectures (ask for them) • Thank you letters that talks about how good you are preferably based on evaluations • File any teaching scores – On professional practice • File letters from national/international visitors asking you to come to visit your program to learn about your innovation • Thank you letters describing the impact their visit has on their subsequent practice 39

Vision of UT-DRO “Global leadership in Radiation Oncology by transforming practice through innovation and excellence in research and education. ” 40