Michael S Ryan1, Constance Tucker2, Deborah DiazGranados3, Latha Chandran4. 1. Department of Pediatrics, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine , Richmond , VA , USA. 2. Office of the Provost, Oregon Health & Science University , Portland , OR , USA. 3. Office of Assessment, Evaluation, and Scholarship, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine , Richmond , VA , USA. 4. Department of Pediatrics, Renaissance School of Medicine at Stony Brook University , New York , NY , USA.
Abstract
Background: In recent years, educational leaders have proposed domains of educational excellence and corresponding metrics to objectively measure contributions of clinician-educators for promotion and tenure (P&T). The purpose of this study was to explore whether P&T committees in United States (US) have incorporated these recommendations into practice. Method: The authors conducted a survey of P&T leaders across institutions in US. Items included questions related to institutional tracks for P&T, domains included in promotional packets, metrics for their measurement, and use of an Educator's Portfolio (EP). Results: Respondents from 55 institutions completed the survey. The presence of a teaching academy/society was associated with the presence of a promotion track for clinician-educators (p = 0.04). Only teaching activities (91%), assessment of learners (55%), and educational scholarship (51%) were required by a majority of institutions. Few institutions used objective methods for measuring impact and less than half (47%) required an EP. Discussion: These results highlight both progress in the recognition of clinician-educators while also suggesting discordance in the perspective of educational leaders and the practice of P&T committees. The authors advocate for establishing a national community of expert medical educators who may assist P&T committees in adopting consensus-based criteria and metrics to evaluate clinician-educators' contributions.
Background: In recent years, educational leaders have proposed domains of educational excellence and corresponding metrics to objectively measure contributions of clinician-educators for promotion and tenure (P&T). The purpose of this study was to explore whether P&T committees in United States (US) have incorporated these recommendations into practice. Method: The authors conducted a survey of P&T leaders across institutions in US. Items included questions related to institutional tracks for P&T, domains included in promotional packets, metrics for their measurement, and use of an Educator's Portfolio (EP). Results: Respondents from 55 institutions completed the survey. The presence of a teaching academy/society was associated with the presence of a promotion track for clinician-educators (p = 0.04). Only teaching activities (91%), assessment of learners (55%), and educational scholarship (51%) were required by a majority of institutions. Few institutions used objective methods for measuring impact and less than half (47%) required an EP. Discussion: These results highlight both progress in the recognition of clinician-educators while also suggesting discordance in the perspective of educational leaders and the practice of P&T committees. The authors advocate for establishing a national community of expert medical educators who may assist P&T committees in adopting consensus-based criteria and metrics to evaluate clinician-educators' contributions.