Guidance on Preparing the A&P Packet.

Documentation of faculty achievements and rationale for the appointment or promotion is essential to the appointments and promotions process. The appointments and promotions packet generally has two phases:

1. Initial documents. The CV and personal statement are prepared by the candidate at the beginning of the appointments and promotions process and are given to the department chair. As a resource to assist faculty when preparing their CV and personal statement, faculty are encouraged to review the A&P archive of materials from successful promotions, organized by rank and track. Additionally, if applicable for the proposed title, the department chair prepares a list of evaluators. These initial documents must be complete before the appointment or promotion process proceeds.
2. Final packet. The final packet is reviewed by the Appointments and Promotions Committee, the Dean, and the Medical Campus Provost and University President, as applicable, and contains all of the required documentation indicated in the table below.

The content of the Appointment and Promotions packet varies by rank and type of appointment or promotion, as indicated in the table below.

BUMC Log Sheet (prepared by Faculty Resources Office)

The BUMC Log Sheet is required for all appointments or promotions on the unmodified track. In such cases, the log sheet will be prepared by the Faculty Resources Office for when the packet is forwarded to the Provost for review.

Candidate’s CV (prepared by candidate)

There is no specific required format, but at a minimum, CVs should include the following content. Candidates should list activities in reverse chronological order. Candidates are encouraged to seek feedback on their CV from their department chair, department representative to Appointments and Promotions Committee, and/or mentors.

• Personal Information

[Name, office address, phone, email]

• Education

[Year, degree, field, institution]

• Academic Appointments (include postdoctoral fellowships)

[Year, title, department, institution]

• Honors and Awards

[Awarding institution, name of honor or award, year]

• Funding (include current, pending, and completed)

[Project title, role, dates, total amount, funder, brief description]

• Teaching

[Classes, dates taught]

• Trainees (include post-doc, doctoral, and masters as appropriate)

[Name, degree, year(s)]

• Committees (include external and internal as appropriate)

[Year(s), name of committee, institution/organization]

• Publications (include journal articles, book chapters, books, reports as appropriate)

[citations]

• Presentations (include invited presentations, meetings, conferences as appropriate)

[citations]

Personal Statement (prepared by candidate)

The following outline should be used as a guide for preparing the personal statement; particular sections will change in weight for different faculty tracks. The personal statement should be a maximum of six pages. For examples of personal statements, faculty are encouraged to review the A&P archive of materials from successful promotions, organized by rank and track. Candidates are encouraged to seek feedback on their personal statement from their department chair, department representative to Appointments and Promotions Committee, and/or mentors.

A. Introduction

• Summary of career trajectory, i.e., training, history, time in track

B. Scholarship³

• Describe overarching theme to scholarship
• Highlight three key areas. For each of the three key areas, describe the area of scholarship and note contributions to advancing our understanding in this area with citations (i.e., what does the world know now that we did not know before?)
• Describe plans for scholarship moving forward
• Provide metrics that illustrate the scholar’s prominence and impact of their work on their field (e.g., number of publications, number of first/last/second author publications, h-index, citations, funding history, invited presentation, advocacy/media contributions, awards, and other metrics as relevant to the particular discipline)

C. Teaching and mentoring³

• Summarize history of teaching activities, including classroom teaching as well as mentoring of pre- and post-doctoral trainees. Highlight the use of innovative methods/approaches, as well as teaching awards and other recognitions.

D. Citizenship and service

• Summarize citizenship (within SPH/BU) and service (to the field, external to SPH/BU). This section is generally briefer than the sections on scholarship and teaching/mentoring.

Evaluator List (prepared by department chair)

The evaluator letters serve as an external marker of a candidate’s ability to perform at the requested title. While candidates may suggest possible evaluators, the final list of evaluators should be selected by the department chair. In all cases, evaluators are asked to provide a letter of reference by the Faculty Resources Office.

The list should be in alphabetical order of evaluator and include:

• name, academic rank/title, institution, and email;
• a brief one-paragraph biography on each evaluator; and
• a description of any relationship with the candidate.

The evaluator list should contain four more than the requested number of letters, as indicated on the table below. If necessary, the Faculty Resources Office will contact the department chair to request additional names. The Appointments and Promotions Committee will be informed of the number of letters sought, as a well as a summary of those who submitted a letter, those who declined, and those who did not respond to the request.

Evaluators must come from faculty of at least the proposed rank of the candidate. For appointment or promotion to the ranks of unmodified associate professor or professor, six external “arm’s length” evaluation letters are required. The stature of the evaluator, as well as the stature of the evaluator’s institution, are considered during the review process and should be selected accordingly. For appointments and promotions to the “of the practice” track, nonacademic evaluators are acceptable provided that their stature in the domain of public health practice is commensurate with the proposed rank of the candidate.

Note that the rationale for obtaining external letters is to obtain broad input from experts across multiple institutions, providing external validity to the appointment and promotion process at Boston University. Accordingly, department chairs should avoid proposing too many evaluators from the same institution. Also note that external letters should be solicited from reviewers outside Boston University (not just outside the BU School of Public Health).

An evaluator is not eligible to provide an arm’s length letter if they have had a significant previous professional relationship (e.g., served as a mentor or supervisor) with the candidate or if they have previously collaborated with the candidate on a publication or grant application. If the only history of co-authorship is limited to a publication with a very long list of authors, then the evaluator is still eligible to provide an arm’s length letter. Letters that do not qualify as arm’s length can still be included, but they must be in addition to the minimum number of required “arm’s length” letters. The chart below indicates the number of letters required for appointment or promotion at each rank.

Evaluator Letters

The Faculty Resources Office solicits and coordinates receipt of evaluator letters. At the time of solicitation, evaluators are provided the criteria specific to the proposed rank and track. All evaluator letters must:

• be on letterhead and signed;
• specifically mention the candidate’s proposed rank;
• assess the quality, stature, and impact of the candidate’s contributions to their field, including scholarship, teaching, and professional or public service; and
• state whether the candidate would qualify for the proposed action at their institution.

Evaluators may also be asked to comment on additional qualifications depending on the particular rank and track (e.g., national or international reputation).

Recommendation Letter from Department Chair

A letter from the department chair is a required component of the appointment or promotion packet. When the department chair is a candidate for appointment of promotion, the Dean will provide the letter.

The letter should describe the department chair’s level of support for the proposed appointment or promotion, the candidate’s qualifications for the proposed rank (i.e., teaching, scholarship, and service), comment on the candidate’s past and anticipated future contributions, and comment on the strategic need within the department and School for the appointment or promotion. Letters for adjunct and secondary faculty should specifically comment on how the applicant will make a contribution to the School and department. If applicable, the letter should specifically address the content of the evaluation letters and votes of “no” or “abstain” from department faculty.

The following outline should be used as a guide for preparing the department chair’s letter. Particular sections will change in weight for different faculty tracks. The department chair’s letter should be a maximum of four pages.

Scholarship: Describe the impact and importance of the candidate’s scholarship in their field, trend of scholarly productivity, significance of peer-reviewed publications, grant funding, and presentations at national or international meetings.

Teaching and Mentoring: Describe the candidate’s performance as a teacher and mentor. Reference course evaluations, direct observations, peer coaching or evaluation, teaching awards, and appraisals of students and trainees. Discuss the candidate’s direction and supervision of pre-doctoral and post-doctoral trainees, as well as mentoring of junior faculty. Evaluate the candidate’s contributions in advising, practica, or other work with students.

National/International Reputation: Describe the national or international reputation of the candidate citing specific examples that support the reputation of the candidate (e.g., meaningful participation in professional organizations, speaking invitations, development of professional standards or guidelines, service on peer review boards and study sections, and/or service on editorial boards of professional journals).

Administrative or Leadership Activities: Describe the nature of any administrative or leadership roles of the candidate and how their performance has impacted the educational, research, and service missions of the department, School and/or University. Include quantitative measures of the performance of the unit supervised by the candidate along with comparisons to similar entities within and outside the institution.

Other Professional Activities: Comment on the nature of the candidate’s participation in departmental, School, or University affairs, and provide an evaluation of the quality of that participation since their last promotion and evaluate the candidate’s professional activities outside of the University.

Letters of Reference: Describe the suitability and objectivity of each reference to evaluate the candidate’s qualifications for promotion at the proposed rank. Include a summative statement regarding the level of support for the promotion from the references and explain letters of reference that are ambiguous or less supportive of the proposed promotion, if applicable.

Future Role: Discuss the candidate’s present and/or future role in the department or School, including teaching, research, and practice.

[3] The scholarship and teaching/mentoring sections may be reordered and emphasized/de-emphasized in accordance with the criteria for different tracks. Faculty on the “of the practice” track may choose to refocus the scholarship section on their accomplishments as a public health practitioner.