Clinical Faculty Promotion Committee Responsibilities

The ultimate responsibility of the Clinical Faculty Promotion Committee is to determine if there is clear and sufficient evidence to support the candidate’s sustained superior performance as a Clinical Faculty member. The varying nature of Clinical Faculty contracts within the School necessitates that individual candidate’s dossiers be evaluated in light of their contracted workload distribution (e.g., clinical, teaching, service, and if applicable, scholarship).

The Committee will oversee the promotion review. The first Committee meeting shall be an orientation session to review the calendar and School, College, and University guidelines for Clinical Faculty promotion. A schedule of future meetings shall also be determined at this time. The established timeline must meet the deadlines specified in the School, College, and University documents.

Following the orientation meeting, committee members must individually review the candidate’s dossier prior to the next Committee review meeting. If a Committee member feels that the dossier is missing information, the member should notify the Chair prior to the scheduled meeting; the chair may elect to obtain the missing information from the candidate.

After the final review of the dossier, the Committee will vote “For” or “Against” the promotion request using a secret ballot. The Committee Chair will then forward the Committee’s recommendation to the School Director by December 1st. The letter should include a written justification for the Committee’s decision and the actual vote tally, including abstentions and non-votes. Committee members may submit an addendum to the evaluation summary that reflects a viewpoint different from that of the Committee. In the event of a negative recommendation from the Committee, no further action is required.

Positive recommendations to the School Director should include the materials submitted by the candidate. The School Director shall inform the Dean of the College of Health Sciences and Professions of the committee’s positive decision in a letter that must be submitted by the last day of fall semester examinations along with a copy to the candidate and the School Clinical Faculty Promotion Committee.

Promotion to Associate Clinical Professor

Within the framework of the candidate’s terms of hire and the standards established within the SAHSW Clinical Faculty Promotion Guidelines, the recommendation for promotion to the rank of Associate Clinical Professor will include those of the following criteria that are identified in the candidate’s terms of hire:

  1. A minimum of six years in the rank of Assistant Clinical Professor from the date of hire (eligible to be considered for promotion in their 7th year at that rank).
    1. A candidate may negotiate with the School Director and Dean for the inclusion of prior experience and productivity decreasing the minimum amount of time required to be considered for promotion to Associate Clinical Professor. In this case, the terms should be clearly delineated in the candidate’s letter of offer.
    2. In rare instances when a Clinical Faculty member has demonstrated exceptionality4 it may be possible for a faculty member with fewer than six years as an Assistant Clinical Professor to be considered for promotion.
  2. . Expertise in the area of clinical practice, including precepting, providing patient care, and/or managing clinical education from the date of hire (see Appendix B).
  3. Demonstrated record of excellence as a teacher (including precepting), mentor, and/or advisor from the date of hire (see Appendix C).
  4. Clear demonstration of quality and magnitude of service and leadership to the Division, School, College, University, community, profession, and clinical environment from the date of hire (see Appendix D).
  5. If applicable, a record of research and/or scholarly productivity throughout the candidate’s career that has contributed to a focus within the candidate’s area of expertise, including interdisciplinary contributions (see Appendix E).

The Promotion Committee shall vote by secret ballot. The Promotion Committee will inform the School Director in writing of the result of the vote and provide a summary assessment of the candidate’s application materials. To be considered for promotion the candidate must receive a majority of positive votes.

In the event of a positive vote supporting promotion, the School Director shall write an evaluative summary addressed to the Dean of the College of Health Sciences and Professions. The Promotion Committee’s letter, the School Director’s letter, and the candidate’s dossier are then forwarded to the College Promotion and Tenure Committee.

In the event of a negative vote for promotion, the School Director shall write an evaluative summary addressed to the candidate. The Promotion Committee’s letter, the School Director’s letter, and the candidate’s dossier are then returned to the candidate.

Promotion to Clinical Professor

Promotion to the highest rank requires achievements and a professional reputation that is recognized nationally as outstanding within the framework of the candidate’s terms of hire and the standards established within the SAHSW Clinical Faculty Promotion Guidelines. The level of contribution must be beyond that expected of an Associate Clinical Professor. Recommendation for promotion from the rank of Associate Clinical Professor to Clinical Professor requires:

  1. A minimum of five years in the rank of Associate Clinical Professor from the date of hire (eligible to be considered for promotion in their 6th year at that rank). In rare instances when an Associate Clinical Faculty has demonstrated outstanding accomplishments it may be possible to be considered for promotion to Clinical Professor with less than five years at rank.
  2. Expertise in the area of clinical practice, including precepting, providing patient care, and/or managing clinical education from the date of hire (see Appendix B).
  3. Demonstrated cumulative record of high-quality teaching, mentorship, and advising, including consistent and significant contributions to the curriculum as demonstrated by the development or revision of courses or curricular sequencing from the date of hire.
  4. Involvement in national/international professional activities and leadership roles in the university and profession from the date of hire.
  5. Where applicable, a continued record of research and scholarship activities throughout the candidate’s career that exceeds the expectations of an Associate Clinical Faculty and contributes to a focus/foci within the candidate’s area of expertise, including interdisciplinary contributions.

The Promotion Committee shall vote by secret ballot. The Promotion Committee will inform the School Director in writing of the result of the vote and provide a summary assessment of the candidate’s application materials. To be considered for promotion the candidate must receive a majority of positive votes.

In the event of a positive vote supporting promotion, the School Director shall write an evaluative summary addressed to the Dean of the College of Health Sciences and Professions. The Promotion Committee’s letter, the School Director’s letter, and the candidate’s dossier are then forwarded to the College Promotion and Tenure Committee.

In the event of a negative vote for promotion, the School Director shall write an evaluative summary addressed to the candidate. The Promotion Committee’s letter, the School Director’s letter, and the candidate’s dossier are then returned to the candidate.

Grievance Procedures

Should a candidate not be recommended for promotion, the candidate is entitled to an appeal. All sections of the Ohio University Faculty Handbook apply (II.F.). Appeals should be initiated at the level at which the decision was made (i.e., department/school, dean, provost). Deadlines for this process are specified in section II.F.2.d of the aforementioned Faculty Handbook.

4 Exceptionality is defined as extraordinary performance, exemplary quality of work, and marks of distinction that distinguish an individual from a) normative requirements within the unit and college and b) from one’s peers with similar credentials, rank, and years of experience