School of Pharmacy, Promotion and Tenure, Department of Medicinal Chemistry

The Department of Medicinal Chemistry has established the following procedures to provide a basis for the proper and deliberate evaluation of candidates for the progress towards tenure (3rd-year review), award of tenure, and/or promotion reviews. The consideration and evaluation of a faculty member’s record is a confidential personnel matter and all records compiled for the purposes of these reviews, including external evaluation letters, will be treated as confidential.

 

The Progress Toward Tenure Review will be conducted according to the guidelines set forth by the Provost and as detailed in the Department of Medicinal Chemistry Faculty Evaluation Plan.

 

Each recommendation for tenure and/or promotion will be considered by members of the tenured faculty in the Department, who will meet and discuss fully each recommendation according to Article VI of the Faculty Senate Rules and Regulations. Only members of the department faculty holding the proposed rank or higher will meet to consider and evaluate fully all recommendations for tenure and/or promotion. The Chair of the Department shall chair this committee. 

 

A faculty member will be eligible for promotion after the completion of at least one academic year in the Department. Early in the fall semester, the Department Committee on Promotion and Tenure will meet to consider all faculty members who are eligible for tenure and/or promotion that year. 

 

Any faculty member of the School of Pharmacy may make a recommendation to the Department Committee on Promotion and Tenure for consideration of the award of tenure or promotion of any faculty member of the Department of Medicinal Chemistry. If a member of the faculty chooses to recommend oneself to the Executive Committee of the School of Pharmacy for tenure or promotion, or to recommend another for tenure or promotion, after the candidate had been considered by the department committee and a recommendation has been withheld, the department Chair will respond appropriately to any inquiry from the Executive Committee or other pertinent committees within the University.

 

When the committee has decided that a candidate should be considered for tenure and/or promotion in that year, external evaluations of the candidate will be solicited as per the Provost’s Guidelines on Requirements for External Evaluations. As soon as possible after a candidate has been identified, the department Chair will solicit a commitment from at least six external evaluators to provide a review of the candidate. After obtaining these commitments, the department Chair will assemble and send the external reviewers a letter that includes the statement: “As a part of the promotion and/or tenure review process, we are soliciting assessments of Professor ___________’s research contributions from academic colleagues and distinguished professionals. These letters will become part of the candidate's promotion and tenure dossier and are treated as confidential by the University to the extent we are permitted to do so by law.” 

 

The letter to the external reviewers should request comment on the following points:

At a minimum, the following items will be provided to the external reviewers:

As soon as possible, the department Chair will make available to the department committee the candidate's complete dossier. After allowing approximately one week for the committee to review the entire record, the Chair will convene the department committee to evaluate the dossier and rate the candidate's performance. 

In making tenure or promotion decisions, the Department of Medicinal Chemistry considers the following three criteria: teaching, scholarship and service. With respect to teaching, no candidate is recommended without evidence that he or she is an effective teacher. An evaluation of teaching effectiveness is reached by soliciting student input, by review of progress of students whose performance in advanced courses depend upon effective learning experience, and by assessment of teaching efforts.

 

With respect to scholarship, no candidate is recommended for tenure or promotion without evidence of serious scholarship, which includes authorship of books, articles, reviews, peer-reviewed papers, or lectures delivered at professional gatherings, and efforts to obtain adequate research funding. These criteria will also include external evaluations as specified in the Provost’s Guidelines on Requirements for External Evaluations.

 

With respect to service, no candidate is recommended for tenure or promotion without evidence of service to the University, the community, his or her profession, the State of Kansas, or the nation. Service is defined as shared administrative duties (committee work, etc.), active participation in the governance and maintenance of learned societies, University organizations, and relevant community organizations.

 

Traditionally, the weighting for these categories is 40% teaching, 40% scholarship, and 20% service. These weights may be changed under extraordinary circumstances after consultation with and approval by the department Chair as stated in the Department of Medicinal Chemistry Faculty Evaluation Plan.

 

At each committee meeting in which the recommendations for tenure and/or promotion are considered, a secretary will be appointed to keep the minutes of the proceedings. The minutes of the proceedings will be retained by the Chair.

 

After discussion of the candidate has been completed, a secret vote will be taken. The secretary and the Chair will tally the vote and the results announced to the committee. A majority vote of the members present will prevail and will constitute the recommendation of the Department. In the case of a tie, the vote will be considered negative and the recommendation for tenure and/or promotion will be denied. 

 

The department Chair shall communicate the recommendations of the initial review to the candidate and provide the candidate with a copy of the corresponding evaluation section of the promotion and tenure form. Negative recommendations shall be communicated in writing and, if the review will not be forwarded automatically, shall inform the candidate that he or she may request that the record be forwarded for further review.