Question Title

* 1. Your last name, your first name?

Question Title

* 2. How should we contact you on the day of the meeting in case there are last-minute schedule changes?

In re: Proposal of Department of Medicine
on behalf of Firstname Lastname
Promotion to
Associate Professor
SOM Track

Question Title

* 3. I am a current/former collaborator, supervisor, supervisee, mentor, and/or mentee of the candidate or have some circumstance that might interfere with my objectivity.

IF YOU HAVE BEEN ASSIGNED THIS CASE, by one week before the meeting you are supposed to assess the case for completeness and contact m-feder@uchicago.edu or oaa@bsd.uchicago.edu if anything is missing. An optional checklist to assist you is at: http://tiny.cc/COAPchecklist .
.
If you are a regular member and NOT assigned the case, you are welcome to complete the above task but not required to do so.
.
The purpose of the remaining questions is to communicate your concerns, if any, to other members so that they may think about them before the meeting. You are free to change your preliminary assessment in light of the discussion in the meeting.

Question Title

* 4. I agree to adhere to the BSD Guidelines (http://tiny.cc/BSDPathways) in evaluating cases. In particular, I agree that in adjudicating SOM track cases I will credit contributions according to their quality and effort REGARDLESS OF THE MISSION DOMAN (clinical, educational, scholarly) IN WHICH THEY OCCUR. I further recognize that the expectations for scholarly activity legitimately vary according to the time protected for it.

Question Title

* 5. LEARNER, DEPARTMENTAL, AND OTHER EVALUATIONS OF TEACHING QUALITY Is the quality sufficient? [***This question is ONLY about teaching evaluations. Everything else comes later.]

Question Title

* 6. LEARNER, DEPARTMENTAL, AND OTHER EVALUATIONS OF TEACHING QUALITY. BRIEF comments [please limit to the space provided] so that other members may prepare for discussion. Just enter ‘OK’ if nothing needs discussion. [***This question is ONLY about teaching evaluations. Everything else comes later.]

Question Title

* 7. SCHOLARLY ACTIVITY: Is the nature, TOTAL amount, and quality of the following

consistent with the 'academic time' or time protected for scholarship?

Question Title

* 8. SCHOLARLY ACTIVITY: BRIEF comments on your response to the prior question [please limit to the space provided] so that other members may prepare for discussion.

Question Title

* 9. With respect to the BASIS FOR PROMOTION:
[Please assess if the candidate equals if not exceeds associate professors here or in peer units with comparable time as a faculty member and 'job descriptions'. ('job description' includes departmental expectations, which may emphasize certain mission domains but normally include some of each) ]

  1Expected and OBVIOUS; needs no discussion 2 Expected but PROBABLE; needs discussion 3 Expected but PROBABLY NOT; needs discussion 4 Expected but obviously NOT; needs no discussion 5 Case presents a 'compelling explanation' why the candidate shou
A. The body of contributions to our missions is coherent or at least has a recognizable theme (not a hodgepodge of unrelated contributions)
B. The contributions, whatever they may be, are special in some way (creative, innovative, of unusual size, audacious, non-routine, masterful, etc.).
C. Has gone beyond what is required for reappointment without a change in rank.
D. The candidate has (a) articulated a clear goal in advance of promotion, and then gone on to achieve it OR (b) identified a significant institutional need in advance of promotion, and then gone on to meet it OR (c) actively improved before promotion to become the institutional expert or 'go-to person' on a topic of institutional significance

Question Title

* 10. BRIEF comments on BASIS FOR PROMOTION [please limit to the space provided] so that other members may prepare for discussion. Just enter ‘OK’ if nothing needs discussion.

T