Meeting of Assistant Professors

1. Meeting of Assistant Professors April 23, 2013

2. Faculty and Academic Affairs Leadership • Joan Cangiarella, M.D., Associate Dean for Faculty and Academic Affairs • Georgeann McGuinness, M.D., Director for Clinical Faculty Mentoring • Naoko Tanese, Ph.D., Director for Basic Science Faculty Mentoring

3. Agenda • Review of Faculty Tracks • Criteria for Promotion on the Non Tenure Track (CI/E and R/E) • Criteria for Promotion and Tenure on the Tenure Track (IC/E and I/E) • Third and Sixth Year Reviews • Mentoring

4. REVIEW OF FACULTY TRACKS

6. Primary Themes: Tenure Tracks • Investigator / Educator Track, a full-time tenure track for those faculty members in any department whose primary career is in independent, investigator-initiated researchand who devote some time to education and service. • Investigator Clinician / Educator Track, a full-time tenure track for those faculty in the clinical departments whose primary career combines independent research with clinical activitiesand who devote some time to education and service.

8. Primary Themes: Non Tenure Tracks • Clinician Investigator / Educator Track, a full-time non-tenure track for those faculty members in clinical departments whose primary career is in the provision of clinical care and who devote a substantial portion of their efforts to teaching, research, and service. • Research / Educator Track, a full-time non-tenure track for those faculty members in any department whose primary career is in research, but who devote a portion of their efforts to education and service.

9. NYU School of Medicine Faculty • 886 full time faculty on the non tenure track: • 752 CI/E • 134 R/E • 156 faculty on the tenure track: • 91 I/E • 57 IC/E • 8 Library

10. Revision to the Policies and Procedures for Appointment, Promotion and Tenure at the School of Medicine (Revised February 1, 2013) • Revisions in 2013 – new non-tenure track pathway for library faculty (http://faculty.med.nyu.edu/promotion-tenure)

11. CRITERIA FOR PROMOTION ON NON TENURE TRACK

12. Criteria for Promotion (Non Tenure Track) Excellence in research (Clinician Researchers or Researchers) Excellence in Teaching (Educators) Excellence in Clinical Care (Clinicians) • Serving as a collaborating investigator in a clinical trial, scientific or educational research that aides in obtaining or renewing grant funding for the institution • Directing a core research facility • Selection as a grants reviewer at the national or regional level • Invited lectures/presentations/visiting professorship • Teaching portfolio – including medical, graduate and post-graduate teaching activities beyond Artman II requirement • Exceptional mentorship and training of students • Teaching awards • Leadership in medical student or residency/fellowship programs • Development of innovative curriculum • Election to distinguished medical societies • Leadership in professional societies • Invitations to lecture at national and international meetings • Development of new clinical treatments or concepts Excellence in Service • Contributions to education administration • Distinguished service as program, course or clinical service director • Service on hospital or school committees

13. CRITERIA FOR PROMOTION AND TENURE ON THE TENURE TRACK

14. Criteria for Promotion and Tenure (Tenure Track) National and International recognition Teaching Service • Invitations to lecture at national and international meetings • Membership on editorial boards of prominent journals • Membership on research peer review and scientific and professional advisory committees • Receipt of honors for scientific and scholarly achievements • Sustained and substantial funding from national peer-reviewed funding agencies (NIH, NSF, government and private sector) • Extraordinary distinction as educators • Attraction of productive graduate students and postdoctoral fellows • Artman II requirements Hospital and school committees • Development of a upward trajectory with renewal of NIH funding • Publication of major peer-reviewed papers – first and last author Innovators Breakthrough in technology or education

15. Third- and Sixth-Year Reviews • Reviews are conducted for all full-time tenure eligible faculty • The Dean’s office notifies the Chair when a review is due • The review is conducted by the Chair and the Departmental Appointments and Promotions Committee • If tenure is considered unlikely, the Chair meets with the faculty member to discuss his/her options • The Chair notifies the Dean and faculty member of the outcome of the meeting in writing

16. Formal review by Chair/DAPC on progress towards tenure Formal review by Chair/DAPC. If likelihood of tenure is poor, discussion with faculty re: change of track Update on Mentoring and Tenure DRAFT / CONFIDENTIAL

17. Tenure Decisions • NIH Grants, including evidence of renewal • Federal grants (non-NIH) and non federal grants • Peer reviewed publications (especially 1st or last-author publications) • Innovative technologies • Non-peer reviewed publications • Book chapters • Abstracts • Presentations

18. TENURESTATISTICS • T9 – T5 (FIRST FIVE YEARS OF PROBATION) • The data show that for the period T9 to T5, there are no statistically significant differences between those candidates awarded tenure and those candidates denied tenure for any of the metrics studied. • T5 – T0 (FIVE YEARS LEADING UP TO TENURE REVIEW) • The data also show that for the period T5 to T, there are statistically significant differences between those candidates awarded tenure and those candidates denied tenure for all of the metrics studied.

19. Tenure Extensions • A faculty member on the tenure track whose progress for completion of the requirements for tenure has been impacted by Super storm Sandy can ask for an extension of the tenure clock for up to three years. Criteria for eligibility include: • Loss of animals • Loss of key reagents • Loss of data • Loss of key technology • Loss of access to important collaborators • Physical relocation of laboratories

20. RESEARCH AND TEACHING EXPECTATIONS

21. Performance Standards for Research Faculty In 2009, the School of Medicine accepted the recommendations of the AEC and implemented the Policy on Performance Expectations for Research Faculty, which defined expectations for research faculty productivity (>25% effort in research), adopting metrics utilized at peer institutions. The process for evaluating research faculty involves multiple steps and engagement of the faculty, Chairs, and the Dean’s Office. 2011 Faculty Affairs Survey Page 14

22. Performance Standards for Research Faculty (AEC) • Basic and clinical science departments • Minimum of 60% of research salary supported on extramural funds • Policy on Performance Expectations for Research Faculty: http://webdoc.nyumc.org/nyumc/files/efaa/attachments/policyonPerformanceExpectationsforResearchFaculty_FINAL.pdf

23. Teaching Expectations (“Artman II”) • In order to be considered for credit “in excess of Artman II”, a faculty member must first fulfill his/her expected teaching obligations through the following: • •Minimum of 50 contact hours (200 effort hours) annually, if requested. Of the 50 contact hours, • At least 10 hours must be in formal courses in undergraduate medical education (UME) • At least 10 hours must be in formal courses in the graduate school (Sackler Institute) • Policy on Expectations Regarding Teaching:http://webdoc.nyumc.org/nyumc_d6/files/faculty/Policy_on_Expectations_Regarding_Teaching_revised_6.13.pdf

24. Mentoring

25. SCHOOL OFMEDICINE NEW YORKUNIVERSITY Faculty Mentoring at NYULMC: A New Paradigm Georgeann McGuinness, MD Naoko Tanese, PhD Director of Clinical Faculty Mentoring Director of Basic Science Faculty Mentoring Office of Education, Faculty and Academic Affairs

26. Task Force on Faculty Mentoring • Mentoring is: • Vital to faculty development • Valuable to departments and the institution • Integral to being a world class institution • An expectation of the institution and the Dean • The Task Force on Faculty Mentoring formed in 2011 with the intention of developing successful faculty mentoring programs for junior and mid level faculty

27. Task Force on Faculty Mentoring • Examine the status of faculty mentoring across the institution • Document baseline expectations of departmental mentoring obligations • Create and facilitate implementation of institution-wide mentoring programs • Delineate goals and responsibilities for all involved parties: • Deans, Chairs, Mentors, Mentees

28. Office of Mentoring & Faculty Development • Directors of Clinical and Basic Science Faculty Mentoring • Steering Committee • Representatives from key faculty bodies • Departmental Mentoring Champions • Identified and charged by Chairs • Responsible to assess need, implement, provide oversight and monitor effectiveness of departmental mentoring programs • Identify & develop a pool of appropriate mentors • Champions will participate in institutional mentoring initiatives

31. Your Role as Mentee • Define expectations for yourself and your mentor • Discuss these early • Provide your mentor with information beyond your CV that will enhance the productivity of your meetings • Your own vision, mission, or life goals • Be respectful of time • Agree on the frequency of meetings – you make the appointments • Maintain a sense of humor and enjoyment • Internalize positive and negative feedback • Expect to be held accountable to goals and deadlines – this is very valuable to you! • Be grateful – express thanks for the time and effort and expertise your mentor has voluntarily extended

32. Overview: Mentoring TT Faculty • Mentoring team of at least 2 tenured faculty • Minimum 2 meetings / year • At least one of 2 meetings should be the team • Remainder can be meetings with individuals • Focus on metrics for Investigator Educator (IE) or Investigator/Clinician/Educator (ICE) track

33. Overview: Mentoring Non TT Faculty • Mentors • Can be a single mentor • Can be group mentoring, faculty development programs, etc. • Ideally 2 meetings / year • Focus on metrics and career development for Clinician Investigator Educator (CIE) or Research Educator (RE) track

34. The Mentoring Toolbox The Faculty Mentoring Handbook Catalogue of Faculty Development Resources A Guide for Chairs Templates for: Mentoring Encounters Yearly Letters Departmental Faculty Surveys

35. The Faculty Mentoring Handbook  Definition of a Mentor and Mentoring • What Does it Mean to Be a Mentor, and Why Be One?  The Mentoring Process • Setting up a Mentoring Program  Guide to Mentoring According to Career Path • Mentoring On the Tenure Track • Mentoring Off the Tenure Track  The Role and Responsibility of the Mentee  Overview of the Promotion Process

36. Faculty Development Resources A centralized catalogue and database of existing programs and other resources available at the NYULMC (OSR, CTSI, ODL, Other) • Developing mentors • Developing junior faculty • Leadership development and succession planning • Developing as a researcher

37. Conclusion • Mentoring is integral to the success of world class academic medical centers • An effective mentoring program will benefit you and your department: • Providing a nurturing work environment • Advancing professional growth and achievement • Increasing career satisfaction of mentors and mentees • Developing the next generation of leaders