Abigail M Yancey1, Matthew Pitlick2, Jamie L Woodyard2. 1. St. Louis College of Pharmacy, St. Louis, MO 63110. Electronic address: ayancey@stlcop.edu. 2. St. Louis College of Pharmacy, St. Louis, MO.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the use of external reviews by colleges of pharmacy (COP) during the promotion and tenure process for pharmacy practice faculty. METHODS: A 25-item web-based survey was sent to 112 Pharmacy Practice Department Chairs. Results were analyzed via descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Fifty-four of 112 colleges (48%) responded to the survey, although respondents had the option to skip questions. Of those who responded, 82% utilize external review in their Promotion and Tenure evaluation. At the majority of colleges that responded, reviewers are selected from a combination of sources including the candidates' personal list and in most circumstances someone other than the candidate contacts the reviewer to determine interest and availability. At almost all responding colleges, the reviewer receives the candidate's curriculum vitae and specific guidelines for completing the review. Based upon 40 respondents, colleges request the reviewer(s) to evaluate the candidate's research (100%), teaching (80%), clinical practice (73%) and external service (73%). CONCLUSION: The goal of this project was to examine the current use of external review during the Promotion and Tenure process for pharmacy practice faculty. This data is a sample of what is being done at the schools that responded. The majority of responding COP utilize external reviews, however methods and requirements vary considerably.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the use of external reviews by colleges of pharmacy (COP) during the promotion and tenure process for pharmacy practice faculty. METHODS: A 25-item web-based survey was sent to 112 Pharmacy Practice Department Chairs. Results were analyzed via descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Fifty-four of 112 colleges (48%) responded to the survey, although respondents had the option to skip questions. Of those who responded, 82% utilize external review in their Promotion and Tenure evaluation. At the majority of colleges that responded, reviewers are selected from a combination of sources including the candidates' personal list and in most circumstances someone other than the candidate contacts the reviewer to determine interest and availability. At almost all responding colleges, the reviewer receives the candidate's curriculum vitae and specific guidelines for completing the review. Based upon 40 respondents, colleges request the reviewer(s) to evaluate the candidate's research (100%), teaching (80%), clinical practice (73%) and external service (73%). CONCLUSION: The goal of this project was to examine the current use of external review during the Promotion and Tenure process for pharmacy practice faculty. This data is a sample of what is being done at the schools that responded. The majority of responding COP utilize external reviews, however methods and requirements vary considerably.
Authors: Diane B Ginsburg; Anandi V Law; Henry J Mann; Laura Palombi; W Thomas Smith; Hoai-An Truong; Lucio R Volino; Jeffrey O Ekoma Journal: Am J Pharm Educ Date: 2020-01 Impact factor: 2.047