Overview of Faculty and Promotions (FAP) Committee at

Boston University School of Medicine

Kitt Shaffer, MD PhD FACRProfessor of Radiology, BUSM

Vice-Chair for Education in RadiologyChair, FAP Committee

topics• committee (members, procedures)• common issues leading to denial• outcomes over recent years

–detailed data for 2011

committee• administration

–Trang TranManager of Faculty ActionsOffice of the Dean and Provost, BUSM

617-638-5301ttran16@bu.edu

committee• Chair, Kitt Shaffer MD PhD

FACR, Prof Radiology– since January 2012

• Vice-Chair, Harold Lazar MD, Professor Surgery– since January 2012

committee• Chair, Kitt Shaffer MD PhD FACR, Professor Radiology• Vice-Chair, Harold Lazar MD, Professor Surgery• Christopher Akey PhD, Professor Physiol/Biophysics• Karen Antman MD, Provost and Dean• Emelia Benjamin MD, Professor Medicine (Jan ’13)• James Feldman MD, Professr Emergency Medicine• Susan Fisher PhD, Professor of Microbiology• Richard Saitz MD, Professor Medicine/Epidemiology• Bob Stern PhD, Professor Neurology (starting Jan 2013)• Jennifer Vasterling, PhD, Professor Psychiatry, VA (Jan ’13)

procedures

• FAP meets 1st Thursday monthly• files are due ~ 3 weeks prior to meeting• Trang distributes agenda, links to files• all committee members can access files• Chair reviews ALL files

Appointment & Promotions procedures

• Associate or Professors presented in detail by one assigned committee member, discussed by group

• Assistant and Instructor approved without discussion unless issues raised

• Votes are recorded

promotions-recent changes• 1/1/12 new review procedure • “All faculty appointments shall be approved by the

President and reported to the Corporation”– As before, President Brown delegated to the

BUMC Provost the approval of:• modified titles (Adjunct, Clinical, Emeritus, Visiting)

• Instructors, Assistant Professors– increased need for internal diligence,

adherence to criteria

promotions-recent changes• reporting to Corporation

– new photo coversheet for each appointment– Deans letter summarizes pros and cons for each– “transparent, thorough, meaningful information” for

Academic Affairs Committee, Board of Trustees– biannual distribution of records to AAC, Trustees– annual reporting to AAC and Trustees

• goal: Improving Faculty Quality

titlesInstructor Asst Professor Assoc Professor Professor

entry level- many new hires

some new hires mid-career advanced career

no reputation local reputation national reputation international or widespread national reputation

academic potential

initial academic accomplishments

moving from mentee to mentor

extensive mentoring

publications +/- some publications

solid publications(includes published curricula if educator)

extensive publications, mostly senior author

presentations +/-

some presentations

national committees and presentations

international presentations, chairing national committees

gen no grants grants +/- some grants for scientist tracks

more grants for scientist tracks

other titles

• Clinical– primarily practice instruction, clinical

teaching– May be voluntary (not paid by BU or

affiliates)– often preceptors for clinical sites– generally no/little scholarly activity

other titles

• Research– scientists and scholars supported primarily by

other faculty’s grants– working for another PI, NOT an independent PI– generally not involved in medical or graduate

student teaching or administration

other titles

• Adjunct–person with primary academic

appointment at another institution–may also have other prefixes (Clinical,

Research)

other titles

• Emeritus– honor and esteem for past service– intent to continue collegial relationships

after retirement– 10 years of service– must be voted by department faculty

Reference Letters

Rank Total number

from non-BU faculty

Instructor 3Assistant Professor 3Associate Professor (± Clinical) 6 3

Professor (± Clinical) 6 4

letters• should focus on qualifications, reputation• ‘arm’s length’

• unbiased opinion of value of contributions• NOT from collaborators• from respected university or program• rank at least as high as promotion sought

organization of CV

Use BU format-- http://www.bumc.bu.edu/provost/ap/appforms/

Remove filler!! Sample items are included to demonstrate the proper

format and should be deleted before saving the final CV.

Delete sections in which applicant has no entries.

organization of CV• bibliography

– Consistent, and list all authors (no et al)

–boldface name–chronological, number items–do not include items that are ‘submitted’

or ‘under review’.–accepted for publication (in press) is ok

organization of CV• Presentations

– organize by date and year, number items– include location and venue as well as title

• Awards– Provide title of the award and group presenting

the award. Assume the reader knows nothing, give details

• Mentorship– list not only WHO but where they are now

Data*2011 was

LCME preparation

type level AY 2012 AY 2011 AY 2010 Initial Professor 5 11 9

Associate 11 28 14Assistant 87 139 90Instructor 63 230 71

TOTAL 166 *408 184Promotion Professor 8 21 12

Associate 14 26 20Assistant 23 23 20Instructor 1 0 0

TOTAL 46 *70 52Tabled 6 8  

Denied 8 (3%) 5 (1%) 5 (2%)Approved 212 471 231TOTAL 226 *484 236

Details: promotion Assistant Professor

since 1/12- all approved

years @ rank

mentees articles pres pres int’l

pres nat’l

grants

3 0 0 0 0 0 04 0 1 11 0 0 0

17 0 1 14 0 2 02 0 2 0 0 0 07 0 2 0 2 12 05 0 3 0 0 0 02 0 3 8 0 0 02 0 3 8 0 0 02 0 5 2 0 0 03 0 7 0 0 0 01 0 28 0 0 0 05 19 42 0 0 0 04 1 8 4 - 1 -AVG

Details, all

Assoc Prof since 1/12

years@ rank

mentees articles pres grants outcome

initial 15 25 0 0 approved

initial 6 25 1 2 approved

3 54 23 17 5 approved

12 3 **10 5 0 approved

7 10 +10 23 2 approved

8 4 ++11 0 11 approved

2 13 *0 20 0 approved

5 0 16 0 10 tabled

5 2 11 26 4 denied

8 0 12 0 0 denied

11 4 7 28 0 denied

5 15 20 14 -

* 39 curricula

AVG (approved)

** 12 chapters

+Associate Ed, Journal++Many nat’lcommittees

Details, promotion Professor since 1/12

time @ rank

mentees articles pres pres int’l

pres nat’l

grants outcome

10 17 94 144 21 83 22 approved

7 25 62 127 30 41 26 approved

1 20 47 20 1 17 15 approved

9 25 44 52 0 0 7 approved

8 12 39 6 0 0 9 approved

7 13 16 42 1 15 0 denied

13 5 16 18 1 3 0 denied

7 20 57 96 10 28 16AVG(approved)

Recent denials• insufficient publications: average for

– Associate ~ 25, range 16-36– Professor ~ 70, range 39-118

• insufficient scope of reputation– regional/national for Associate– national/international for Professor

Other issues• insufficient grant documentation

– amounts, role– should name PI for each grant

• issues with letters– only from friends, collaborators

• inappropriate addition of “Clinical”– only for those without teaching,

administrative, or research potential

What if promotion is denied?

FAP Chair calls or meets with Department chair •Discusses reasons for denial

– options for faculty for future– provide advice on any insufficient documentation

questions?