Abstract
The process for academic promotion, including establishing the criteria for each academic rank and track, is governed by formal policies and procedures that should be strictly enforced, to protect applicants, reviewers, and the institution. The process differs by school but usually involves review at several levels in the institution. Reviews are conducted by both committees and senior administrators. Evidence of achievements are assessed from several perspectives including peers from other disciplines and external reviewers to facilitate a balanced and unbiased assessment. Each applicant must be assured a fair, objective, and thorough review. At each stage, the outcome must be supported by well-documented evidence. The final decision may take months and require approval from the governing board or highest administrative levels of the parent university. Applicants generally have the right of appeal, but the basis of appeals may be restricted to demonstrating flaws in the process, rather than the merits of decisions. The associate dean for faculty affairs (or equivalent) is responsible for the functioning and integrity of the process. Recommended best practices stress clarity and consistency in standards, procedures, and decisions, objectivity and candor in evaluations, and professional behavior by all involved in the promotion process.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Bunton SA, Corrice AM. Perceptions of the promotion process: an analysis of the US medical school faculty. Anal Brief. 2011;11:5.
Buchanan GR. Academic promotion and tenure: a user’s guide for junior faculty members. Hematology Am Soc Hematol Educ Program. 2009;2009:736–41. https://doi.org/10.1182/asheducation-2009.1.736.
Papaconstaninou HT, Lairmore TC. Academic appointment and the process of promotion and tenure. Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 2006;19:143–7.
Coleman MM, Richard GV. Faculty career tracks at US medical schools. Acad Med. 2011;86:932–7.
Bunton SA, Mallon WT. The continued evolution of faculty appointment and tenure policies at US medical schools. Acad Med. 2007;82:281–9.
American Council on Education, American Association of University Professors, United Educators Insurance. Good practice in tenure evaluation. Washington DC: American Council on Education; 2000. https://www.aaup.org/sites/default/files/files/Good%20Practice%20in%20Tenure%20Evaluation.pdf.
Proceedings of the Diversity and Inclusion Innovation Forum: unconscious bias in academic medicine how the prejudices we don’t know we have affect medical education, medical careers, and patient health. https://members.aamc.org/eweb/upload/Unconscious_Bias.pdf.
Liaison Committee on Medical Education LCME® Functions and Structure of a Medical School Standards for Accreditation of Medical Education Programs Leading to the MD Degree March 2017. http://lcme.org/publications/. Accessed June 2017.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Walling, A. (2018). How the System for Academic Promotion Works. In: Academic Promotion for Clinicians. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68975-3_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68975-3_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-68974-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-68975-3
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)