career advancement in the academic physical therapy environment ( pt/pta programs) who wants it, who...
TRANSCRIPT
CAREER ADVANCEMENT IN The ACADEMIC PHYSICAL THERAPY ENVIRONMENT
(PT/PTA Programs)
Who Wants It, Who Gets It, How to Position Yourself for a Successful
Decision
Joyce Mac Kinnon, EdD, PT
Professor and Associate Dean
School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences
Indiana University on the IUPUI campus
Objectives
At then end of the session participants should be able to:
1. Clearly articulate their terms of hire2. List CAPTE accreditation requirements for the
academic physical therapy environment of choice3. Define the terms: contract renewal, long term
contract, promotion, tenure4. Describe the usual ranks and progressions
associated with the tenure/promotion process and long term contracts
5. Explain the concept of the criteria for advancement being mobile rather than static
Objectives (cont)
6. Define scholarship based on the Boyer model (used in CAPTE criteria)
7. Position themselves for success in career advancement in the academic physical therapy environment of choice.
Letter of Hire
What should be included:Start date
Length of annual contract
Teaching, service and research expectations
Rank and tenure status
Salary
Start up package
Method and frequency of assessment
Miscellaneous
CAPTE Standards for Core Faculty PT Programs Contemporary expertise in teaching area Effective teaching and student eval skills Scholarly agenda (using the Boyer model) Record of service Blend of individuals with doctoral preparation
or clinical specialization At least 50% of core faculty have advanced
doctoral degrees
CAPTE Standards for Core Faculty PTA programs Minimum of 2 full time core faculty One of which must be a PT Each qualified by education and experience
to fulfill assigned responsibilities Program director must have a master’s
degree or higher
Usual Ranks/Usual Progression
Lecturer Assistant professor
(3/5-6) Associate professor
(5-10) Full professor
Annual reviews are VERY important!
Tenure
Reciprocal agreement between an individual and an academic unit in which the individual is expected to maintain certain standards of teaching, research and service and in return is provided with academic freedom and economic security
Congruence Between Unit and University Mission and Vision
Is your work valued by the unit, school and university?
The Exemplary Faculty Person at a Research Intensive University
PhD Post doc External funding as PI from
highly respected agency Publications-highly ranked journals Cited by others Excellent teaching evaluations Meaningful service
Boyer’s Scholarship of Teaching, Research and Service
Discovery: development of new knowledge Integration: bridges disciplines; broader
context Application: use of expertise in
applied settings Teaching: helping students expand
their knowledge
Scholarship Assessed
Clear goals Necessary tools and expertise Established methodology Significance of the work Reflection
Personal Statement
Impact of your work Specific goal/theme Consistent with the mission of your unit Continued education Dissemination Continued contribution
REFERENCES
Boice R (2000): Advise for New Faculty Members. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Boyer EL (1997): Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate. Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Brookfield SD (1995): Becoming a Critically Reflective Teacher. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Bunton SA and Mallon WT (2007): The continued evolution of faculty appointments and tenure policies at US medical schools. Academic medicine, 82(3):281-89.
CAPTE (2013): Evaluation Criteria PTA Programs CAPTE (2013: Evaluation Criteria PT Programs Chism NVN (1999): Peer Review of Teaching: A Sourcebook. Bolton,
MA: Anker.
References (continued)
Fleming VM, Schindler N, Martin GJ, DaRosa DA (2005): Separate and equitable promotion tracks for clinician-educators. JAMA, 294(9):1101-04.
Glassick CE, Huber MT, Maeroff GI (1997): Scholarship Assessed: Evaluation of the Professoriate. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
O’Meara KA (2002): Scholarship Unbound: Assessing Service as Scholarship for Promotion and Tenure. Nw York, NY: Routledge-Falmer.
Seldin P (2004): The Teaching Portfolio: A Practical Guide to Improved Performance and Promotion/Tenure Decisions. Bolton, MA: Anker.
Shapiro HN (2006): Promotion and tenure ad the scholarship of teaching and learning. Change: The Magazine of Higher Education, 38(2): 38-43.