Scott David M, Kelsch Michael P, Friesner Daniel L
School of Pharmacy, College of Health Profession,North Dakota State University.
Innov Pharm. 2019 Oct 31;10(4). doi: 10.24926/iip.v10i4.2153. eCollection 2019.
Critics of the promotion and tenure system contend that promotion and tenure may lead to a decline in research productivity ("dead wood phenomena") by those faculty. To assess this perception, we compiled the publications and grants at the time of application for promotion, and again through 2017 for the same faculty following promotion and/or tenure.
Promotion documents at a school of pharmacy at a public Midwestern university were assessed. Mean publication rates and grant dollars per year per faculty member were compared to the same group of faculty (n=13) pre and post-promotion.
At the time of promotion to associate professor, mean numbers of total publications per year per faculty in the pharmacy practice department were 1.1, compared to 1.4 post-promotion. For pharmaceutical sciences department faculty, corresponding means were 5.0 and 4.1, respectively. At the time of promotion to full professor, mean numbers of total publications per year for pharmacy practice faculty were 7.0, compared to 7.2 post-promotion. For pharmaceutical sciences faculty, corresponding means were 3.5 and 4.7, respectively. For grant activity, both associate professors and full professors increased the mean total dollars per year from pre-promotion to post-promotion for both departments.
Research productivity at this school of pharmacy continues to be either maintained or increased since promotion for the collective group of faculty. This evidence runs counter to the perception that promotion and tenure may lead to decreased scholarly productivity. The study provides a roadmap for other schools/colleges to quantify research productivity and make comparisons to national mean levels reported in the literature.
晋升与终身教职制度的批评者认为,晋升和终身教职可能会导致这些教员的研究生产力下降(“朽木现象”)。为了评估这一观点,我们收集了教员申请晋升时的出版物和资助情况,并在其晋升和/或获得终身教职后,于2017年再次收集了同一批教员的相关信息。
对一所位于中西部的公立大学药学院的晋升文件进行了评估。将每位教员每年的平均发表率和资助金额与同一组教员(n = 13)晋升前后的情况进行了比较。
在晋升为副教授时,药学实践系每位教员每年的总出版物平均数量为1.1篇,晋升后为1.4篇。对于制药科学系的教员,相应的平均数分别为5.0篇和4.1篇。在晋升为正教授时,药学实践教员每年的总出版物平均数量为7.0篇,晋升后为7.2篇。对于制药科学教员,相应的平均数分别为3.5篇和4.7篇。在资助活动方面,两个系的副教授和正教授从晋升前到晋升后的每年平均总金额都有所增加。
自晋升以来,这所药学院教员的集体研究生产力持续保持或提高。这一证据与晋升和终身教职可能导致学术生产力下降的观点相悖。该研究为其他学院提供了一个路线图,以量化研究生产力并与文献中报道的全国平均水平进行比较。