Analysis of Research and Scholarship Criteria Within Promotion and Tenure Documents of US Pharmacy Schools

Snider, Allen; Hight, Kacey; Brunson, Allison; Payakachat, Nalin; Franks, Amy M.

doi:10.5688/ajpe7983

Cited by 26 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The current study builds on our previous work to study the documents related to RPT processes at institutions in the United States and Canada (Alperin et al, 2019;McKiernan et al, 2019;Niles et al, 2020), as well as similar work by others in this area (Moher et al, 2018;Rice et al, 2020;Snider et al, 2020). In one of our previous studies (Alperin et al, 2019), we reported that nearly 60% of institutions overall and nearly 80% of research-intensive universities mentioned 'impact' in their RPT documents.…”

Section: Previous Researchmentioning

confidence: 53%

How faculty define quality, prestige, and impact in research

Morales

McKiernan

Niles

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the calls for change, there is significant consensus that when it comes to evaluating publications, review, promotion, and tenure processes should aim to reward research that is of high "quality," has an "impact," and is published in "prestigious" journals. Nevertheless, such terms are highly subjective and present challenges to ascertain precisely what such research looks like. Accordingly, this article responds to the question: how do faculty from universities in the United States and Canada define the terms quality, prestige, and impact? We address this question by surveying 338 faculty members from 55 different institutions. This study's findings highlight that, despite their highly varied definitions, faculty often describe these terms in overlapping ways. Additionally, results shown that marked variance in definitions across faculty does not correspond to demographic characteristics. This study's results highlight the need to more clearly implement evaluation regimes that do not rely on ill-defined concepts.

show abstract

Section: Previous Researchmentioning

confidence: 53%

How faculty define quality, prestige, and impact in research

Morales

McKiernan

Niles

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Third, traditional RPT criteria are very narrow in the outputs they are willing to acknowledge. Various reviews show that peer reviewed publications and successful grant applications are by far the most popular RPT criteria in use, across disciplines and countries (Alperin et al 2019;Rice et al 2020;Snider et al 2021). Other common criteria are authorship order and journal impact factor, and, to a lesser extent, citation counts (Rice et al 2020).…”

Section: Assessing Researchersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fostering a research integrity culture: Actionable advice for institutions

Peuter

Conix

2022

Science and Public Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research institutions’ research culture is increasingly recognized as a central driver of research integrity. Institutions are urged to develop research integrity promotion plans to foster a culture of research integrity. A host of guidelines and associated initiatives have been issued but specific, actionable recommendations for institutions are scattered across the scientific literature and generally not acknowledged and implemented (yet). Based on a broad literature review, in the current paper some practical advice for institutions is suggested, grouped into (1) policies, procedures, and processes; (2) dealing with breaches of research integrity; (3) education and training; and (4) monitoring and evaluation. With each section, we formulate specific recommendations.

show abstract

“…Acknowledging there is tremendous variability among CSOP promotion criteria and scholarship requirements for practice faculty, let us assume the value placed on scholarship is greater in a tenure track position as compared to nontenure track. 2 Clinical conundrums, discussions with interprofessional colleagues, and questions posed by trainees at a practice site often ignite the next great research study. Although not exhaustive, several tangible advantages to the individual practice faculty member for maintaining an active practice are listed below.…”

Section: Value To Faculty Membermentioning

confidence: 99%

Tenured or tenure track practice faculty should maintain a clinical practice

Bookstaver

2021

J Am Coll Clin Pharm

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Analysis of Research and Scholarship Criteria Within Promotion and Tenure Documents of US Pharmacy Schools

Cited by 26 publications

References 36 publications

How faculty define quality, prestige, and impact in research

How faculty define quality, prestige, and impact in research

Fostering a research integrity culture: Actionable advice for institutions

Tenured or tenure track practice faculty should maintain a clinical practice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About