RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Policies related to prepromotion/tenure reviews and postpromotion/tenure reviews are critical to faculty advancement and retention. The objective of this study is to describe the utilization, timing, and application of such policies as described within promotion and/or tenure documents from US colleges/schools of pharmacy. METHODS: PT documents were collected from internet searches and/or contact with administrators at each institution. Qualitative content analysis was used to systematically review policies related to pre and postpromotion/tenure reviews. Policies were reviewed for required vs optional status, timing, possible outcomes, and other characteristics. RESULTS: PT documents were analyzed from 121 (85%) colleges/schools. Of these, 26% included policies for prepromotion review of nontenure-track faculty, while 45% included pretenure reviews for tenure-track faculty. The majority of prereviews were required (65% and 91%, respectively) and conducted after 3 years in rank on average. Only 22 (18%) included postpromotion/tenure reviews, with most (17, 77%) conducting reviews after a prespecified time in advanced rank (mean 3.9 years). Potential negative consequences of postpromotion/tenure reviews were more frequently described than potential rewards. CONCLUSION: This analysis of promotion and/or tenure documents revealed that pre/posttenure reviews were more commonly employed than pre/postpromotion reviews. Documents most frequently described potential negative consequences that may result from unsatisfactory postpromotion/tenure reviews. Academic leaders should consider the implications of these trends within their own institutions and how their own policies may be improved to create clearly articulated, fair, and parallel processes for both tenure-track and nontenure-track faculty.
