Analysis of Research and Scholarship Criteria Within Promotion and Tenure Documents of US Pharmacy Schools
Allen Snider, Kacey Hight, Allison Brunson, Nalin Payakachat, Amy M. Franks
Abstract
<b>Objective.</b> To describe criteria for evaluating faculty scholarship within the promotion and tenure guidance documents of US schools and colleges of pharmacy. <b>Methods.</b> Promotion and tenure documents were obtained from the websites of US pharmacy schools or requested via electronic mail, and institutional characteristics were collected from publicly available online data. A qualitative content analysis was conducted to systematically catalogue document characteristics and criteria for promotion and tenure. <b>Results.</b> Promotion and tenure guidance documents from 121 (85%) of 142 pharmacy schools were analyzed. Institutions were 55% public and equally distributed across Carnegie institutional classifications as well as geographic and extramural funding stratifications. Publications (94%) and grants and contracts (87%) were the most frequently included criteria for faculty advancement. More than 50% of schools recognized the criteria within promotion and tenure guidance documents but did not explicitly require faculty to achieve them before receiving promotion and/or tenure. For institutions that required publications for advancement, the most frequently required criterion was publication in peer-reviewed journals (47%). Few schools (22%) documented a specific number of required publications. <b>Conclusion.</b> This analysis provides a comprehensive review of scholarship criteria in academic pharmacy promotion and tenure guidance documents. There was wide variability among scholarship criteria, and documents often lacked specific language defining scholarship requirements<b>.</b> As a result, faculty may find the documents less helpful for self-assessment and preparation toward promotion and/or tenure. These benchmark data can assist pharmacy faculty and administrators in developing and revising promotion and tenure guidance documents to include clear criteria and better align with peer institutions.