sample personal statement for promotion to associate professor

Making the Rounds

University of iowa department of internal medicine, the personal statement for promotion dossiers.

Hopefully you found some  helpful tips for updating your CV  after the last few posts, whether for promotion or just for general updating. For those faculty currently working on promotion materials, let’s take a look at the personal statement.

Peter Snyder, MD, associate dean for faculty affairs and development, advises that “the personal statement is the most important part of the promotion dossier. It should not just be a re-listing of items on your CV, but it should bring to life the things you are doing. Tell a story that indicates the importance and impact of your work.”

If you struggle to find the right words or need help just getting started, you can find examples of personal statements for promotion in the health care and bioresearch fields online. The Office of Faculty Affairs also provides de-identified statement samples for  research  and clinical faculty (both assistant to associate and  associate to professor ).

If you do gather ideas from examples, be careful to rewrite your statement in your own words and voice. Use phrases and language that are familiar to you and sound like you. Do not copy and paste from another personal statement—it’s easier to recognize this than you might think.

My best advice for getting started is to first create an outline. Jot down the main areas that are required and specifics that you want to cover. You don’t even have to write full sentences at this point.

Once the outline is done and the structure of your statement is set, filling in details should be a little easier. Start with an introduction that discusses the foundation of your career, work, and interests, and how you have built upon that foundation. 

Emphasize your activities and accomplishments in terms of how they have benefited your growth as a clinician and/or researcher, as well as what your work has contributed to your greater area of expertise and our own institutions.

Be sure to include recognitions of your work. Recognitions could include letters from your division or department executive, media coverage, or work that was highlighted at a conference.

Finish your statement with a summary of your accomplishments  and  your goals for the next few years. You’re not only highlighting what you have done, but what you plan to do next.

Finally, don’t forget the small details: spell out abbreviations and acronyms that are common in your field but may not be recognized by others; make sure your statement looks neat and clean, with consistent font, line spacing, and indentations; double-check that any names and titles are correct; and most importantly, have someone else read it over. A fresh pair of eyes may catch areas that need a bit of refining.

As always, if you would like assistance with your personal statement, please feel free to contact me at   [email protected] .

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Discover more from making the rounds.

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Type your email…

Continue reading

Personal Statement

Feinberg requires personal narrative statements for all promotion or tenure applications. Effective personal statements contextualize the accomplishments listed on the CV or provide supplementary information that may not be apparent from review of the CV. The personal statement is also an opportunity to communicate with reviewers outside your field, helping them to understand the significance of your work in your specialty.

Prepare your personal statement manually using the appropriate template as a guide:

• Personal Statement for Clinician-Educators, Team Scientists, and Investigators : use this template if you are appointed to the clinician-educator, investigator, or team scientist track
• Personal Statement for Health System Clinicians : use this template if you are appointed to the health system clinician career track
• Personal Statement for Research Faculty : use this template if you are appointed to the non-tenure-eligible research track
• Save your file using this file naming convention: LastName Personal Statement  (e.g., Simpson Personal Statement)
• Preferred length is 1-3 pages
• Important!  Focus on explaining accomplishments since your last promotion (or since your initial appointment, if you now hold your first faculty rank), rather than recounting your entire career.
• Do not simply repeat the accomplishments listed in your CV; instead use the personal statement to provide additional context or other information that is not evident from your CV and that would help reviewers evaluate your application for promotion or tenure (for example, explain specific contributions that may not otherwise be appreciated by reviewers such as clinical expertise, describe extenuating circumstances that may have impacted your progress, list accomplishments that do not appear in other parts of the application)
• Use the personal statement to help reviewers who may be unfamiliar with your field to better appreciate the accomplishments on your CV by explaining the significance/impact of your work in your specialty
• The dean's office or department chair may provide your personal statement to referees when soliciting reference letters (candidates do not solicit their own reference letters) 
• For Team Scientists : If specializing in the research domain, use the personal statement to highlight your contributions to team and collaborative research.
• For Clinician-Educators : Use the personal statement to highlight your accomplishments in your chosen domains as recorded in the Feinberg Faculty Portal (navigate to Profile > Current Appointment to confirm). If you have accomplishments in more than these two domains, address your chosen domains first so that reviewers clearly see the connection between your career activity and the criteria they use for evaluation. You are welcome to highlight accomplishments in additional domains as well, but without first establishing achievement in your chosen domains, you can give reviewers the impression that your career is unfocused.
• For Health System Clinicians : Use the personal statement to highlight your clinical impact and recognition as well as your accomplishments in your chosen area of concentration. If you have accomplishments in more than one area of concentration, address your chosen area first so that reviewers clearly see the connection between your career activity and the criteria they use for evaluation. You are welcome to highlight accomplishments in additional areas of concentration as well, but without first establishing achievement in your chosen area, you can give reviewers the impression that your career is unfocused.

Personal Statements

Guidelines for tenure track, clinical scholar, and clinical series.

• Length of the Document : Overall, length will depend on the candidate’s experience and the position for which he or she is being considered. Generally these statements should be two-to-five single-spaced pages in length. Those that are less than two pages are often deemed as lacking substance or not demonstrating that the candidate comprehends the value or importance of an academic appointment at the KSOM.   A succinct document rather than a more conversational one, however, will be appreciated by the readers.
• Content: The writer should describe goals and plans for demonstrating excellence in scholarship, teaching (didactic, laboratory, and bedside), school and university service, and, if relevant, patient care or service. The document should also highlight features of a candidate’s professional training and experience that will facilitate his or her achieving the stated goals and plans. This should not simply repeat information available in the candidate’s curriculum vitae.
• Scholarship : To insure that the FAPTC (and/or UCAPT and Provost, for Tenure Track and Clinical Scholar) are able to interpret outside letters of recommendation and scientific achievements appropriately, the candidate should succinctly summarize a) an overview of their field for a general biology audience, b) the ongoing questions, challenges and/or controversies in the field, c) the overarching goal or theme of his or her scholarly work, including how different directions of the work may be related, d) the novel approaches that the candidate has developed or applied to the field, and c) how their research findings have impacted the field.
• Teaching and mentoring: It is expected that the goal for all faculty members is to provide excellence in teaching and mentoring for students, residents, and/or fellows, and, for more senior faculty, junior faculty colleagues. The candidate should summarize their accomplishments in these areas, and discuss their particular area of teaching/mentoring emphasis.  They should present specific examples of how they have advanced the trainee/mentee experience in their area of emphasis, and how they have developed as a teacher and mentor.  If the candidate is developing or improving educational programs (e.g., for medical students or residents, graduate students, special focus journal clubs, initiating new courses, implementing new teaching methods), these should be described.
• Service: The candidate should provide an explanation of how he or she will contribute to the service and direction of programs important to the Keck School of Medicine. This can include outside professional activities such as service to scientific and professional organizations, federal programs (NIH, NSF, CDC, DOD, DOE, etc.), and editorial responsibilities.
• Patient Care: A candidate with clinical responsibilities should provide an explanation of how he or she plans to provide the highest level of patient care and plans to develop or improve existing clinical programs at the KSOM.

Guidelines for Clinician Educator, Practitioner, and Research Track

• Clinician-Educator Series: Candidates for appointment or promotion to advanced rank on the Clinician-Educator Series should provide a personal statement that focuses on teaching/education/mentoring (Section VII. B. 4, above) and clinical care (Section VII.B. 6, above). Minor sections of the personal statement can provide brief information about university service activities, and any research the candidate wishes to provide, but it is not required that these be elaborate or lengthy. Any activities supporting research, however, such as mentoring a medical student in an RSP project, or enrolling patients in research studies such as clinical trials should be succinctly presented. Leadership activities should be discussed more thoroughly for promotion to the rank of Professor. The length of the document should be no longer than 2-3 single-spaced pages, and the document should not simply reiterate information that can be ascertained from the CV.
• Practitioner Series: Candidates for appointment or promotion to advanced rank on the Practitioner Series should provide a personal statement that focuses on their role in clinical care (Section VII.B. 6, above). Any activities supporting research, however, such as mentoring a medical student in an RSP project, or enrolling patients in clinical trials should be presented. Information about mentoring activities for trainees, colleagues, students, or the community should be presented in this statement as well. Sections of the personal statement can provide succinct information about university service activities, any research the candidate wishes to provide, but it is not required that these be elaborate or lengthy. Any activities supporting research, however, such as mentoring a medical student in an RSP project, or enrolling patients in research studies such as clinical trials should be succinctly presented. Leadership activities should be discussed more thoroughly for promotion to the rank of Professor. The length of the document should be no longer than 2-3 single-spaced pages, and the document should not simply reiterate information that can be ascertained from the CV.
• Research Series: Candidates for appointment or promotion at advanced rank on the research series should provide a personal statement that focuses on their research and scholarship as described in Section VII. B. 3 above. In addition, a candidate on this series should clearly state whether they would wish to be considered as an “Independent researcher” or a “Critical member of a research team” as described in detail in Section IV. A. Additional information about mentoring activities for research team members, and service should also be succinctly discussed. Leadership activities should be discussed more thoroughly for promotion to the rank of Professor. The length of the document should be no longer than 2-3 single-spaced pages, and the document should not simply reiterate information that can be ascertained from the CV.

University of Pennsylvania

Promotion to Associate Professor

III. THE STANDING FACULTY OF ARTS AND SCIENCES

C. PROMOTION TO ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR

• Promotion to the rank of Associate Professor in SAS is an appointment for an indefinite term and thus must be made only after a very careful evaluation of the candidate and of the needs and plans of the department and of SAS. Persons recommended for promotion to tenure should show evidence of significant scholarship, as recognized by specialists in the appropriate field of study both inside and outside the University. Candidates must exhibit breadth of intellectual interests relevant to the academic needs and plans of their department and the School of Arts and Sciences and effective teaching and service to the department and to the University.

No search is required when a promotion within the Standing Faculty is considered. However, the Affirmative Action Officer must be convinced that equitable consideration for promotion has been given to all other untenured faculty members in the department with equal or greater number of years in the same rank, including female and minority faculty members.

When a department decides to make a formal review to consider promotion from Assistant Professor to Associate Professor, it must request the candidate to nominate up to three persons from outside the University to serve as external reviewers. In addition, the department should nominate at least eight persons to serve as external reviewers. These reviewers should be persons selected for their national and international scholarly standing as well as for their knowledge and judgment of the field of the candidate. The names of the reviewers nominated by the department should not be made known to the candidate. The letter that requests the evaluation will be sent from the department, but must conform closely in spirit to the sample letter contained herein. The letter must request comparisons which are as quantitative as possible and must not "lead" the reviewer by suggesting, for example, that the department wishes to promote the person being reviewed. A sample of the suggested letter ( SAS Form 02-18 ) is enclosed. The actual letter is to be reviewed by the appropriate Associate Dean before it is sent.

The Provost's Staff Conference requires six external letters in the dossier in addition to any written by reviewers nominated by the candidate. If fewer than six letters are received from reviewers proposed by the Department, the Department must ask for authorization of additional reviewers to ensure that the minimum of six letters is received.

Please review Section II.I on page 11 (Confidentiality of Employee Records.)

Recommendations for promotion from Assistant Professor to Associate Professor can be made at any time during a person's appointment as an Assistant Professor. However, University policy requires that an Assistant Professor be notified of his or her promotion or termination no later than the end of the sixth full year of service as an Assistant Professor.

Departmental recommendations should reach the Dean's Office no later than the beginning of the spring term of the sixth full year of service. Obviously, the department must begin its own review well before that time. In the event that advice from the department is not received in time to permit the Personnel Committee, the Dean, and the Provost's Staff Conference to complete their reviews before June 30 of the sixth full year of the appointment, the Dean will send a notice of termination to the faculty member to protect the interests of the School of Arts and Sciences.

Important note: the deadline for action before the end of the sixth year of service may be modified if the tenure probationary period is extended according to the University's Policy on Extension of Tenure Probationary Period (2006 Handbook , Section II.E.3 . revised February 24, 2006), which is as follows:

When a qualifying events occurs, the following members of the faculty are eligible for an extension of the corresponding probationary period: (a) non-tenured members of the standing faculty --the tenure probationary period; (b) clinician-educators, members of the research faculty – the promotion review period . The qualifying events that trigger eligibility for an extension are: a child is born, adopted, or placed for foster care, into the faculty member's household and the faculty member is the primary or co-equal parental caregiver by reason of a serious health condition (as defined in Section 2611(11) of the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993) persisting for a substantial portion of the period for which the extension is sought, the faculty member is required to act as the primary or co-equal parental caregiver for a child, or the primary caregiver for a spouse, or domestic partner (as defined in the domestic partner benefits policy); or by reason of a serious health condition (as defined in Section 2611(11) of the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993) persisting for a substantial portion of the period for which the extension is sought, the faculty member is unable to perform the functions of his or her position. In the event that both spouses or domestic partners (as defined in the domestic partner benefits policy) are members of the standing faculty, or clinician-educators, or the research faculty, both spouses and domestic partners are covered by sections A.1 and A.2 of this section. The length of each extension shall be one year. The faculty member shall complete the Notification of Extension form and transmit it to the Provost’s office, with copies to the department chair and Dean, within one year of the birth, adoption, or foster care placement. Deans and department chairs are responsible for ensuring that all faculty eligible for an extension receive the Notification of Extension form.  Extensions of the tenure probationary period shall be without prejudice to the obligation of the University to provide faculty members with twelve-months' notice of termination. When a faculty member who has taken an extension under this section is being reviewed for tenure or promotion to associate professor, the dean, in his/her letter soliciting evaluations from external reviewers, should explicitly state that the candidate has taken an extension pursuant to this policy. The dean should further state that the policy of the University of Pennsylvania is to evaluate the productivity of each candidate who has been granted an extension as if he or she had been in probationary status for the normal duration, so that the candidate is not penalized for having received the extension. Upon being notified of a faculty member’s application for a one-year extension of the probationary period, the University will approve the application unless specific and compelling factors require its denial. The action of the Provost shall be communicated in writing to the faculty member and shall specify the revised date of tenure review and termination date of the probationary period and (in the event that the request is denied) shall specify the grounds for the denial. For untenured members of the standing faculty on the tenure track, the total probationary period cannot exceed ten years. For assistant professors on the clinician-educator track, and assistant professors on the research track, the total probationary period cannot exceed thirteen years.

• Dossier for Promotion to Associate Professor ( SAS Form 99-10)

Chair's Letter The tenured members of the department should evaluate the candidate for promotion to tenure in terms of his or her accomplishments to date and potential for continued professional growth in both scholarship and teaching. The Chair's summary of this evaluation should include both the positive and negative aspects of the discussions. The Chair should comment on the candidate's scholarly achievement to date, potential for continued growth, teaching record, and other contributions to the department and to the University. A description of the academic program of the department should be included, along with a clear indication of how the candidate fits within that program. The priority of the candidate's subfield relative to other aspects of the program should be made clear. The Chair's letter must include the formal vote of the faculty on the recommendation including the manner in which the vote was taken. Positive votes, negative votes, abstentions, and absences must all be included in this statement. No dossier will be considered by the Personnel Committee if it lacks an explicit statement of the formal vote. Minority opinion should be summarized in the Chair's letter or in a separate letter from a faculty member designated by the Chair. Faculty members on leave or temporarily absent should be given an opportunity to express their views.

•  Curriculum Vitae of the Candidate

The candidate is responsible for preparing an up-to-date curriculum vitae which includes scholarly accomplishments and plans, teaching experience at the University (course numbers and descriptions, numbers of students, dissertation supervision, graduate student placement, and undergraduate independent study supervision), and administrative and committee work. All work published and in progress should be included in the bibliography. Candidates must provide inclusive pagination for all bibliographical citations in the curriculum vitae (exact page numbers for articles, number of pages for books and monographs). In addition, the Chair should annotate the curriculum vitae or append to it a statement that will enable readers of the dossier: (1) to distinguish the journals in which the candidate's work appears that are refereed from those that are not; and (2) to identify the writings that are primarily by the candidate in cases of multiple authorship. The Chair should identify the most significant scholarly journals in the field and indicate the protocol for the field with regard to the order of names on jointly authored works. Include all professional reviews of books written by the candidate. No dossier for promotion to Associate Professor will be considered by the Personnel Committee if it lacks this information. Two copies of each major publication, accompanied by a check list ( SAS Form 99-20 ) to ensure their return, must be included. When a candidate for promotion has, had, or will have grant support from outside agencies, the Department should use SAS Forms 99-28 , 99-29 , and 99-30 to elaborate.

• Personal Statements

The candidate is encouraged to provide a personal statement(s) detailing research, teaching, and service approaches and goals. Typically, this statement--or these statements--greatly strengthen the understanding of the candidate in the various stages of review.

• Teaching Chronicle ( SAS Form 99-15 )
• Evaluation of teaching

Although evaluations of teaching must accompany any recommendation for promotion, the evaluation in the case of promotion to Associate Professor with tenure must be especially thorough. The dossier must contain all available School or departmental course evaluations. If small advanced graduate courses have not been evaluated, that fact should be noted in the teaching chronicle. Student comments from the School or departmental evaluation forms should be included. If the number of comments is large, a representative sample should be included together with a statement concerning the method of selection. Letters should be solicited from teaching assistants who have worked under the supervision of the candidate. If this number is large, a sampling of TA's from different courses will be sufficient. Letters should also be solicited from current or former students. Please do an appropriate random solicitation, indicate in the dossier how the solicitation was carried out, and include all letters received. Precede such letters by a sample of the soliciting letter (see SAS Forms 99-26 and 99-27 for suggested letters). Material should be organized to indicate the source of all evaluations, and whether the students are graduate or undergraduate students. Letters may also be included from faculty who have observed the candidate's teaching, worked with the candidate in jointly taught courses, or served in a teaching mentoring role for the candidate. The particular relation should be made explicit. The Chair is responsible for providing enough information so that the teaching data can be appropriately assessed. A departmental analysis of the teaching data in a format that is consistent from case to case within the department would be helpful. Average departmental ratings and plots of instructor quality ratings versus class size can be helpful. In interpreting the teaching evaluation of a faculty member teaching a specific course, it might be helpful to know how those ratings compare with the ratings of other faculty who have taught the same course.

• Faculty Distribution by Rank ( SAS Form 99-16 )
• Letters from University Faculty

At least three letters from University faculty from within the department and, if appropriate, from other departments or schools must be included. The report of an ad hoc departmental committee may be substituted for individual letters from department faculty.

• Letters from External Reviewers

The list of approved external reviewers ( SAS Form 99-17 ) and a sample of the Chair's standard letter requesting the reviews should precede the letters. Non-respondents should be noted on the list. The letters should be included in the order in which the names appear on this list. Other external letters may be included after those from reviewers on the approved list. If these latter letters are to be given weight by the reviewing committees, some indication of the credentials of the reviewers and of the circumstances under which they appear should be included.

• Notification of Candidate

It is the responsibility of the Chair to notify the candidate in writing of the official action taken before June 30 of the penultimate year of the candidate's probationary term. If promotion has not been approved, the Chair should notify the candidate with a letter similar to that suggested in SAS Form 99-21 . A copy of the letter countersigned by the candidate must be sent to the Dean's Office together with a Faculty Equal Opportunity Compliance Statement ( SAS Form 99-5 ).

• Procedures when the Department does not Recommend Promotion

After either a formal (external) or an informal (internal) review of the candidate's qualifications, the department may decide, for either scholarly or programmatic reasons, that it does not wish to recommend that the candidate be promoted to Associate Professor. In this event, a formal recommendation that the candidate not be promoted must be forwarded to the SAS Dean no later than the beginning of the spring semester of the candidate's sixth year as an Assistant Professor. Important note: the deadline for action before the end of the sixth year of service may be modified if the tenure probationary period is extended according to the University's Policy on Extension of the Tenure Probationary Period (see Section III.C.3 .). Dossier Prepared for Dean In general, one copy of all documentation which was considered in making the decision should be forwarded to the Dean. The dossier should include: Chair's Letter The Chair's letter should summarize the discussion in the department and state the reasons that the department decided not to recommend promotion. The formal vote of the faculty members must be included. Dissenting opinion, if present, should either be summarized in the Chair's letter or in a separate letter from a faculty member designated by the Chair.

• Curriculum Vitae of Candidate

The curriculum vitae should be presented in a manner similar to that presented for a positive recommendation.

• Evaluation of Teaching

All teaching evaluations considered by the department in making its recommendation should be included. All available course evaluations, whether formally considered or not, should be included. Evaluation by faculty peers is encouraged.

Any letters from University faculty, either in the department or in other departments or schools, that were considered in the evaluation by the department should be included.

• External Letters

All letters from external reviewers, if any, that were pertinent to the evaluation should be included. If these were solicited from an approved list, the list and a sample of the Chair's letter of solicitation should be included. If the letters were written by external scholars not on the approved list, the standing of the writers and the occasion for the letter should be explained.

• Documentation of Affirmative Action Procedures

It is the responsibility of the Chair to notify the candidate in writing of the official action taken before June 30 of the penultimate year of the candidate's probationary term. A letter similar to that suggested in SAS Form 99-21 should be used for this notification. A copy of the letter countersigned by the candidate must be sent to the Dean's Office together with a Faculty Equal Opportunity Compliance Statement ( SAS Form 99-5 ).

• Appeal of Unfavorable Recommendation

If the department does not recommend promotion, the candidate may appeal the case to the Dean. The candidate should present, in support of the appeal, whatever information he or she believes has either been overlooked or inappropriately evaluated. If the Dean believes that the department has not considered all aspects of the case, the Dean may ask the department to reconsider the case. The Dean also has the option of forwarding the dossier to the Personnel Committee without the endorsement of the department. In this event, which should be extraordinarily rare, the Dean must inform the Chair of the department of this action and the reasons for it.

• Procedures for Resubmission of Case by Departments - see section F .

• Faculty Affairs and Recruitment
• Academic Review
• The Personal Statement

Personal Statement Guidelines: CE, Research, and Tenure Tracks

• Printable Guidelines

Personal Statement

Ce, research, and tenure (revised may 2022).

• Personal Statement Length: 1-2-Pages Maximum

Purpose The purpose of this statement is for you to help the Committees on Appointment and Promotion, the Dean’s office, the Provost’s Office, and extramural consultants understand your career path and your most significant achievements.  Information provided in the Personal Statement should complement but not repeat your CV. The Personal Statement is your opportunity to help guide your promotion review by clearly describing and emphasizing your accomplishments. 

Refer to COAP Guidelines Appendix A: Demonstrating Impact for Promotion for possible ways in which impact may be demonstrated.  This document is not a checklist of necessary requirements, rather it provides examples.

Section 1: Introduction Characterize your career path and describe what led to your particular focus.

Section 2: Accomplishments Describe 3-5 of your most significant accomplishments since your appointment or last promotion, relevant to your faculty track, and specify how your efforts have advanced the School of Medicine’s academic mission.

• If accomplishments involve publications, please cite and describe clearly your specific roles in the work.
• If one or more of your accomplishments was part of team science, please describe your unique and critical contributions to the effort.
• Depending on your faculty track, these accomplishments may include research, clinical, administrative, community efforts or policy, or education. If your most significant accomplishments are focused on education, identify the categories here and indicate “See Education Impact Statement” for details. Faculty in this situation may choose to attach their Education Impact Statement to their Personal Statement for inclusion in their Extramural Consultant Reference Packet.   

Section 3: Clinical All clinicians should describe clinical expertise/activities.

Section 4: Plans Describe your future directions and areas of planned expansion and growth in your area of expertise.  

Section 5: Optional Mitigating Circumstances Statement COAP recognizes that significant events (pandemic, personal or family issues, etc.) may impact one’s academic trajectory. Some candidates will choose to incorporate such mitigating factors into their Personal Statements so they are available for review by extramural consultants in addition to COAP and the Dean’s office. Others will prefer that such mitigating factors not be presented to external consultants but would like them considered by our internal processes. If a candidate prefers the latter, then please provide a brief addendum to the Personal Statement for internal purposes only.

Remember the Personal Statement is your opportunity to help guide your promotion review process by clearly, but concisely, describing and emphasizing your accomplishments.  Education-related accomplishments will be detailed in your Education Portfolio. The personal statement, not including the optional addendum, should be one to two pages long. 

Faculty Development section navigation

Personal statements, overall advice.

• This is where the evaluators get to know your unique story as a coherent narrative – align this to the promotion track you have chosen and your main strengths
• Review examples from previous submissions to get a feeling for structure
• Attend workshops organized by the School of Medicine to help prepare your packet
• Emphasize your strongest attributes based on your promotion track and accomplishments
• Sell yourself without sounding arrogant
• Have your Personal Statement reviewed for feedback by your mentor(s) and then by the chair of the faculty development committee before submitting them for your final packet.
• Reviewers – with relevant expertise
• Non-Neurology faculty (medical faculty outside your specialty, faculty throughout the institution, Board of Trustees)
• Statement cannot be highly technical. It must be pleasant read, understandable by a broad audience, while being sophisticated.

Organization

• 5 pages maximum
• Discuss briefly your background
• Cover each promotion area – scholarship, teaching, service
• Start with greatest area of distinction
• Address work at the departmental, SOM, university, local, national, and international levels
• If a weakness, contextualize it

Opportunity to

• Tell your professional story – coherent narrative
• Highlight most meaningful accomplishments
• Extract from CV what is most important
• Differentiate self from mentor(s)
• Be creative about how you frame information
• Explain where things overlap
• Address future directions in your career

Background (very brief, paragraph)

• Who you are – job description
• Why on particular track (if relevant – e.g., track switch)
• How you got where you are – career trajectory
• Life style changes that might explain a lag

Scholarship

• Summarize research interests
• Set self up in the field you are in
• Focus on a few research topics
• Discuss impact of your work, how it shifted the field, and how it is unique/different
• Convey ways work has reached out
• Address number and quality of publications and mention key papers and journal
• Note funding success for research (federal, private)
• Note media recognition
• See NIH document on Team Science
• Your unique role in team science, as a Co-Investigator
• Link future with present

Teaching (Most important for Clinical and MEST tracks)

• Where are you teaching
• Who learners are
• Philosophy of teaching (covered more in Teaching Portfolio)
• Courses taught institutionally, locally, nationally, internationally
• Courses organized
• Supervision
• Dissertation and thesis committees
• Lectures given locally
• Lectures given at another university
• Lectures given nationally and internationally
• Comments on your evaluations
• Unique service roles and responsibilities
• Leadership roles – department, SOM, institution, locally, nationally, internationally
• Clinical service
• Infrastructure service
• Running a service core
• Committee membership and role
• Manuscript reviewing, editorial boards, special issues, and editing
• Study section responsibilities (ad hoc, member)
• Organization of meetings
• Organization of symposia
• Teaching administration (though could go under service)
• Collaborations
• Consulting (e.g., for nonprofit organization)
• Talks/presentations/panel discussions
• Health fairs and science fairs
• Media – public education
• Serving on boards
• Coordinating community activities

Promotion to Associate Professor

MINIMAL CRITERIA FOR PROMOTION to Associate Professor:

NOTE: Beginning with nominees whose packets are submitted in the fall of 2020 there exists a Clinician-Educator and Clinician-Administrator pathway to promotion to Associate and Full Professor on the Non-Tenure Track. Below is the SOM-promulgated informational slide addressing both the new and traditional pathways.

Department of Anesthesiology Profile of a Nominee for Promotion to Associate Professor

I. citizenship :, a. departmental, sustained contributions to the department (e.g. “citizenship):, for at least three years immediately prior to the nomination, the individual should meet or exceed the threshold criteria for citizenship set forth for those academic years in the inventory of activities (“activity matrix”) with service provided directly to the department and/or by representing the department in the school of medicine., b.  extra-departmental, appointment to or elected leadership on som/umb/medical center committees, national societies, specialty governing boards, or editorial boards., have an established regional/national reputation in our specialty as defined by:, clinical faculty:  serving at least twice as a visiting professor at other academic anesthesiology departments and serving at least twice as an invited lecturer or panelist at a major meeting of anesthesiologists (not just presenting an abstract)., research faculty: serving at least twice as a visiting professor at other academic anesthesiology or non-umb basic science departments and serving at least twice as an invited lecturer or panelist at a major meeting of anesthesiologists or scientists in your field (not just presenting an abstract).,   ii. education :, sustained contributions to the department’s educational mission:, for at least three years immediately prior to the nomination; the individual should meet or exceed the threshold criteria for education set forth for those academic years in the inventory of activities (“activity matrix”).  educational activities should be “department-centric.” valued educational activities center upon teaching:  department residents and fellows; medical students on clinical anesthesiology rotations; and, (while expressly representing the department) pre-clinical medical students and graduate students (e.g., gpils)., the individual should demonstrate multiple examples of sustained excellence in teaching. examples include:, resident teaching scores > 50%ile; excellent to outstanding record of medical/graduate student teaching scores (e.g., >4/5 or 8.5/10, with supportive comments) for multiple lectures., developing new educational tools/curricula used here (department/som) or elsewhere in the training of medical students, anesthesiology residents, or anesthesiology fellows., (co-) chairing educational committees in the department or in the som/umb., for research faculty, evidence of successful training and mentoring of students and postdoctoral fellows.,   iii. scholarly output :, the number of published, peer-reviewed (i.e., pubmed) papers (co-) authored should meet the 25%ile for candidates successfully promoted to associate professor in the school over the trailing three years. (note: currently 22 papers but updated yearly - see resources links listed under faculty development at umaryland.edu/anesthesiology) numbers of citations are also listed. the h-index (calculated for som apt review) is more important for research faculty., for those nominees considered on the path 2 (for clinician-educators and clinician-administrators) to promotion on the non-tenure track it is suggested that the minimum number of peer-reviewed papers (co-) authored by a proposed nominee be 60% of the 25%ile or thirteen (13). for this upcoming cycle (ay22), the department considers this number to be a “hard deck;” that is, the department apt committee will not consider promotion of any nominee on the clinician-educator pathway who has (co-) authored twelve (12) or less peer-reviewed manuscripts., invited presenter at national meetings and at other academic institutions (see above), for research faculty, extramural (preferably federal) funding of salary, covering the rank-associated amount required by departmental and som policies (% of the nih salary cap), and primarily achieved as a principle investigator.,  iv.  clinical service :, be recognized as an excellent clinician and “team player” by your peers in the department and throughout the medical center and all other clinical locations where the faculty member practices. evidence of clinical excellence include data reviewed during the annual review meeting (e.g., quantitative and qualitative evaluations, annual clinical billing and compliance data, annual quality and safety data) and a willingness of both departmental and non-departmental faculty members to declare written support of your clinical excellence., approved by departmental apt/dr. rock: 01_10_20.

• Academic promotion tips (6) - Craft your career narrative

Last of a six-part blogpost series on how to write an effective application for promotion in academia

Anne-Wil Harzing - Mon 21 Mar 2022 17:41 (updated Wed 20 Sep 2023 11:24)

Evidencing your positive impact for the core aspects of an academic job: Research & Engagement , Teaching & Learning , Leadership & Service is crucial. Additionally, and especially when applying for promotion to (Associate) Professor, however, universities might also want to know what you "profess". In other words, a coherent statement of what you see as the core of your academic identity.

Drawing on your academic identity can turn your application from a fairly sterile list of achievements to a compelling career narrative. It demonstrates you are an individual who cares about their profession, rather than a cardboard cut-out rattling off a list of tick-boxes.

Finding your career narrative is not always easy. Some academics are able to craft this narrative prospectively, others construct it retrospectively - perhaps even drawing inspiration from how others see them. Below I provide examples for each of these three options.

Craft your career narrative prospectively

For some academics a career narrative comes naturally and dates from the very start of their careers. These are usually academics who have a very focused research interest and/or a burning passion for a particular field of research.

One of my colleagues, Andrea Werner , recently applied successfully for promotion to Associate Professor. Her application had a very clear narrative around her interest in Business Ethics and CSR. This was reflected in both her contribution to research and to teaching.

My research interest in Business Ethics and Corporate Social Responsibility derives from my belief that business should be a force for good in society. I thus have a passion for applied research that, in line with the University’s aim, “has a positive impact in society”. I am passionate about teaching Business Ethics; today’s business world requires a thorough understanding of ethical and social responsibility issues. Through my teaching, students develop crucial employability skills such as analytical and critical thinking, developing solutions to ethical issues, and the ability to speak up about misconduct.

However, it was also evident in her leadership, which - in addition to being PhD coordinator and seminar coordinator for the department - involved appointments as a reviewer for the Departmental Research Ethics Committee (REC), editorial board member of Journal of Business Ethics , a premier journal in the field, and co-lead of a cross-departmental research cluster in Business Ethics and Corporate Governance .

Hence, her passions and strengths were abundantly clear from her application. They also provided an excellent match with the need of the university and the school. As Andrea also effectively evidenced her performance in research, teaching, and leadership, the decision to promote her is likely to have been an easy one.

Many of my Middlesex Business School colleagues have an equally burning research passion that guides their career. Here is a selection that might inspire you to write your own:

• Anastasia Christou : My interdisciplinary research on the inequalities of gender, class, race / ethnicity, sexualities in migrant/minority, youth/ageing groups advances decolonial contributions and transnational ethical awareness toward social justice, inclusivity, and equity.
• Parisa Dashtipour : My research explores the organizational and psychosocial dynamics that shape and limit mental health at work.
• Athina Dilmperi :  My research examines how consumption can improve well-being, focusing on how lives can be enriched by the creative/cultural and recreation domains. I collaborate with industry and policy makers to provide solutions that increase societal well-being.
• Tim Freeman : My research explores issues of public service delivery, policy and governance, and my current and recent funded projects and publications have an economic development emphasis in relation to migrant communities within the UK and global south.
• Yan Jiang : My research explores how to manage and achieve sustainability in the supply chain. This research is closely related to the industry, involving relationship management, mutual influence, and key performance outcomes for supply chain members.
• Nico Pizzolato : My research looks at the transformation of capitalism over the past century and the changing role and subjectivities of workers in it; within this horizon, I focus on labour migration; coercion and labour; workplace democracy.
• Ericka Rascon Ramirez : My research focuses on the causes of low investments in human capital. I use economic and social psychology theories to inform the design of interventions that aim to improve learning, sexual health, and civic education in Africa and Middle East.
• Salma Soliman : My passion for multi-disciplinary research leads me to explore different topics and industries (e.g. global value chains, refugee entrepreneurship, agro-industry, hotel industry) under the general umbrella of institutional voids in emerging markets (EMs).
• Clarice Santos : My research interests reflect my commitment to, and passion for, diversity, equality, inclusion, and ultimately, social justice. I use community building and engagement to co-create better futures, focusing particularly on women and ethnic minorities.

Create your career narrative retrospectively

Not all of us have such a strong narrative running through our career. Personally, I very much "stumbled into" a PhD and an academic career . I chose my research topics based on whatever fascinated me at the time or the practical challenges that I encountered, rather than having a burning research passion. So, I certainly didn't have a coherent narrative ready when I started writing my promotion application.

But sometimes you can craft this narrative retrospectively. You might be able to deduce it from a pattern of actions, much like an emergent strategy. This might not be possible for your entire career profile, but you may be able to do this for one or more elements of your application.

When I crafted my promotion application for Associate Professor, I really struggled to tie together five different research programmes. However, after some reflection I was able to capture the principles underlying them (see below) and was able to write up the rest of application evidencing these principles.

My approach to research has been guided by three principles: conducting innovative research in new areas; designing rigorous, systematic, and large-scale empirical tests of core models and theories in international management; and challenging commonly held beliefs through a critical evaluation of established work. As a result, my research has consistently pushed the frontiers in the area of International Management and has become highly cited by academics in the field.

My teaching statement was fairly generic. To make my case, I relied mostly on the breadth of the courses I taught, my good teaching evaluations, and my textbook in International HRM . At the time there wasn't yet the need to establish you had consistently taught according to the 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 or even 20 “principles of effective teaching”, and/or embodied the “values of the university” through your teaching.

However, I think I did manage to find a fairly coherent - retrospective - rationale for my approach to leadership. What do you think?

There are so many opportunities for leadership in University management that it is difficult to know where to channel one's efforts. I found that one of the best places for me to show leadership was in a place that would capitalise on my research skills and my passion for mentoring, so I’ve taken on a large-scale Departmental role – the directorship of the PhD program. [...] I was also able to express this through the development and maintenance of my academic website, www.harzing.com, into a major resource centre in international and cross-cultural management.

For those that are cynical about exercises in "story-telling", I am not suggesting you disingenuously invent a story. What I am suggesting is that you use your promotion application as a reflection on what is important to you. Your evaluators will find it much easier to appreciate your contributions if they display some coherence.

Be inspired by colleagues' view of your work

You know how readers sometimes find meanings in a poem that the writer was oblivious about? How art critics create narratives that would perplex the artist? Similarly, someone else might find a narrative in your academic work that you had not even consciously realised. Given some distance, your colleagues can often see the wood, when all that you can see are the individual trees.

This doesn't always happen in time for your promotion application unfortunately. In my case it didn't. But I do have two good examples that occurred in the years after my promotion to Full Professor. In 2015, the volume " Grands Auteurs en Management International " devoted an entire chapter to my contributions to the field of International Business. The authors of the chapter saw a logic in my research programmes that I had not consciously realised, and documented explicitly how it influenced the field.

Harzing's work offers a strong contribution by virtue of its integration into the core field of international management [...]. First of all, she adopted a logic of testing and extending previous research ( Harzing, 2000 ; Harzing and Noorderhaven, 2006a ), especially at the start of her career. In addition, her typology of modes of control ( Harzing, 1999 ) was taken up by many researchers and has profoundly influenced the literature on coordination and control mechanisms.

Her reflections on expatriation, and in particular the question of the failure rate for expatriation (Harzing, 1995 , 2002 ), have strongly influenced international HR researchers. Her work on the influence of the country-of-origin and the questioning of the European MNC model ( Harzing and Sorge, 2003 ; Harzing, Sorge and Paauwe, 2002 ; Harzing and Noorderhaven, 2008 ) was likewise pioneering. It is interesting to note contributions with long-term co-authors, on the same themes, which contributed to a powerful cumulative narrative logic.

Earlier, in 2011, Stephen Bensman's review of my Publish or Perish book and his assessment of me as a "woman with an agenda" was entirely unexpected. But yes, he was absolutely right! My involvement in the area of bibliometrics and the creation of the Publish or Perish software (see screenshot above) was driven by a strong drive to democratise access to research evaluation  and to change the playing field for Social scientists .

I must say I loved the bit at the end of the review where he compared the Publish or Perish software to a " torpedo blasting paths through the evaluative defenses surrounding the entrenched positions of academia ". It is the closest I ever got to being a revolutionary!

The winning combination

The winning combination for a promotion application is a great narrative which exudes passion, combined with concrete evidence of impact (in Research & Engagement , Teaching & Learning , and Leadership & Service ). One without the other is difficult to sell, having neither is a sure-fire way to fail.

Many promotion applications that I have seen over the last two decades have neither. They are often dry and disjointed summaries of the " I have done this, this, and this " without evidence of impact. Sometimes they are supplemented by an implicit or explicit threat " by the way my promotion is long overdue and you'd better promote me or else... ". They lack both a coherent narrative and substantive evidence.

Your promotion panel should get a feel for your academic identity and passion. They don't want a cardboard cut-out academic, slotting into a standard template. Although it might not always feel like it, they are not looking for a person that just "ticks the boxes". Who are you? What makes you tick? What do you stand for? Their hearts should swell with pride for having such a great colleague. They shouldn't be falling asleep wrestling through a tedious record of roles, or getting annoyed by baseless bragging without evidence.

In its new 2022 promotion guidelines, Middlesex University explicitly asks applicants to reflect on their academic identity before setting out their case for promotion: "Briefly reflect on the motivation for the activities in which you have been involved and your overarching goals, principles and values."

Pro tip: link your narrative to your university's mission

This shows you engage with the university outside your own department, which is crucial for career progression to senior levels. Yes, I know strategy documents can often appear contrived and vacuous. But they do tell you something about the university's values and priorities. Is it mainly focused on teaching and learning, or does it seem to prioritise research? Is its focus on fundamental research or more applied research? How does it engage with external stakeholders?

For instance, Middlesex University's purpose is to " create knowledge and put it into action to develop fairer, healthier, more prosperous and sustainable societies ". Referring to its Latin motto "rerum cognoscere causas", LSE's purpose and vision is to be " a community of people and ideas, founded to know the causes of things, for the betterment of society ". Their ultimate focus is not worlds apart, but the emphases are quite different. 

In 2022 Middlesex University completely revamped its promotion criteria. In addition to explicitly including collegiality as one of its criteria, it also made the link to its mission more explicit: "Strategy 2031 presents our vision and aims for the future, our values and what we value. It is important that promotion and progression align with our shared values and the process reflects the focus on collegiality and a continued commitment to equality, diversity and inclusivity."

Finally: See it as time for reflection

Does even just reading this make you feel tired? I am not surprised. But don't forget that this series is meant to be a distillation of "best practice". Don't feel you have to all that is listed above to be successful in your promotion application. You don't have to be a superhero (see also: We need a different kind of superhero: improving gender diversity in academia ).

However, writing up a good case for promotion does take time. It took me more than a month full-time to put my first one together, though partly that's because in most Australian universities the case runs to twenty pages. I won't lie, I have cursed all the time I have had to spend on promotion applications. I was promoted internally to Associate Professor and full Professor and was rejected the first time, so I have had to spend several months of my research time on this.

However, ultimately, I am grateful that I was "forced" to put in the work. It really made me think about my academic career and where I wanted to go. It led directly to a major change in how I represented my research programs and argued my contribution to my discipline. It also made me more aware of the metrics that are used to evaluate academic performance, which came in handy in my later role as Associate Dean Research at the University of Melbourne and my role as Research Mentor and Staff Development Lead at Middlesex University.

So try to see work on your promotion application not as a "chore" to comply with silly rules or as a battle with organizational politics. Instead, see it as an investment in yourself to help you really articulate what you are proud of and how you would like to spend the next 5, 10, or 15 years of your academic career.

Finally, don't forget that you can reuse your carefully crafted promotion statements in lots of other settings: funding applications, applications for academic awards or fellowships, yearly performance appraisals, applying for external promotion. Heck, you can even use them nearly twenty years after the fact to write up blogposts about promotion applications :-).

Related videos

Academic promotion series

• Part 1: Internal vs. external promotion
• Part 2: Seven reasons why external promotion is easier
• Part 3: Seven advantages of internal promotion
• Part 4: Tips for promotion applications
• Academic promotion tips (1) - Understand the process
• Academic promotion tips (2) - Treat your application as a journal submission
• Academic promotion tips (3) - Evidence your impact in Research & Engagement
• Academic promotion tips (4) - Evidence your impact in Teaching & Learning
• Academic promotion tips (5) - Evidence your impact in Leadership & Service

Related blogposts

• How to ensure your paper achieves the impact it deserves?
• Open Syllabus Explorer: evidencing research-based teaching?
• Presenting your case for tenure or promotion?
• Be proactive, resilient & realistic!
• Finding a Unicorn? Research funding in Business & Management research
• How to measure research impact: YouTube series
• How to improve your research impact: YouTube series

Find the resources on my website useful?

I cover all the expenses of operating my website privately. If you enjoyed this post and want to support me in maintaining my website, consider buying a copy of one of my books (see below) or  supporting the Publish or Perish software .

Copyright © 2023 Anne-Wil Harzing . All rights reserved. Page last modified on Wed 20 Sep 2023 11:24

Anne-Wil Harzing's profile and contact details >>

• Education Home
• Medical Education Technology Support
• Graduate Medical Education
• Medical Scientist Training Program
• Public Health Sciences Program
• Continuing Medical Education
• Clinical Performance Education Center
• Center for Excellence in Education
• Research Home
• Biochemistry & Molecular Genetics
• Biomedical Engineering
• Cell Biology
• Microbiology, Immunology, & Cancer Biology (MIC)
• Molecular Physiology & Biological Physics
• Neuroscience
• Pharmacology
• Public Health Sciences
• Office for Research
• Clinical Research
• Clinical Trials Office
• Funding Opportunities
• Grants & Contracts
• Research Faculty Directory
• Cancer Center
• Cardiovascular Research Center
• Carter Immunology Center
• Center for Behavioral Health & Technology
• Center for Brain Immunology & Glia
• Center for Diabetes Technology
• Center for Immunity, Inflammation & Regenerative Medicine
• Center for Public Health Genomics
• Center for Membrane & Cell Physiology
• Center for Research in Reproduction
• Myles H. Thaler Center for AIDS & Human Retrovirus Research
• Child Health Research Center (Pediatrics)
• Division of Perceptual Studies
• Research News: The Making of Medicine
• Core Facilities
• Virginia Research Resources Consortium
• Center for Advanced Vision Science
• Charles O. Strickler Transplant Center
• Keck Center for Cellular Imaging
• Institute of Law, Psychiatry & Public Policy
• Translational Health Research Institute of Virginia
• Clinical Home
• Anesthesiology
• Dermatology
• Emergency Medicine
• Family Medicine
• Neurosurgery
• Obstetrics & Gynecology
• Ophthalmology
• Orthopaedic Surgery
• Otolaryngology
• Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation
• Plastic Surgery, Maxillofacial, & Oral Health
• Psychiatry & Neurobehavioral Sciences
• Radiation Oncology
• Radiology & Medical Imaging
• UVA Health: Patient Care
• Diversity Home
• Diversity Overview
• Student Resources
• GME Trainee Resources
• Faculty Resources
• Community Resources
• Personal Statement

New Personal Statement Requirements for 2023-24 The purpose of the personal statement is to provide your narrative of accomplishments, current activities and future directions. For 2023-24, you are also required to add two stand-alone statements: Describe engagement with learners in your mission area of excellence (clinical, research, education, community). Give a brief self-evaluation regarding adherence to ASPIRE values. You should describe your contributions to at least one of the ASPIRE values (Accountability, Stewardship, Professionalism, Integrity, Respect, Equity). Personal statement that do not include these points will be returned.”

Preparing Your Personal Statement

Be sure to view the Writing Your Personal Statement Video  ( view presentation slides ). Learn how to compose and format your personal statement for promotion and tenure.

Personal Statement Guidelines

• Consider your audience, which will include referees and P&T committee members who are scientists and physicians.
• List the high level points you wish to convey. As you write, stay at a summary level and do not go into too much detail on any one point.
• Consider starting with the most important part of your job and ending with a summary.
• We encourage you to submit up to two pages.
• Use active voice, which makes your writing stronger and more direct.

Sample Personal Statements

Access to SharePoint requires an Eservices password. If you do not know your password, reset it here by logging in with your UVA Health credentials.

The faculty listed below have given permission to the Office of Faculty Affairs and Development to share their personal statements. There are new personal statement requirements for 2023-24 that will not be reflected in the sample statements–ASPIRE Self-Evaluation and engagement with learners.

ASPIRE Self-Evaluation

Here is one example of an ASPIRE self-evaluation: “My adherence to the ASPIRE values is demonstrated in my commitment to equity. In my teaching activities, I prepare the presentations with attention to the use of inclusive, non-biased language, images, and interactions. I begin each session by stating my intent to be inclusive and unbiased, and I invite feedback during the session and in session evaluations regarding my performance relative to my goal. To date, all feedback has been positive and affirming of my work towards my goal.”

Engagement with Learners

Include a stand-alone description of your engagement with learners in your personal statement. Engagement with learners may take many forms, such as teaching, mentoring, hosting students in your lab, co-authoring posters/papers/abstracts, participating in a student interest group, designing curriculum, hiring a work-study student.

Tenure Eligible Tracks Tenure Ineligible Tracks

• Annual Review Process, Forms and Resources
• Faculty Personnel Actions
• Academic Investigator
• Clinician Educator
• Clinician Investigator
• Clinical Faculty
• Instructional Faculty
• Independent Research
• Research Support
• For Department Administrators
• P&T Eligibility and Key Terms
• Preparing for P&T – FAQs
• Referee Requirements
• UVA SOM Clinical Portfolio
• UVA SOM Research Portfolio
• UVA SOM Teaching Portfolio
• Department P&T Resources
• P&T Faculty Experts
• Recently Promoted & Tenured Faculty
• Committee on Women in Medicine and Science (COWIMS)
• Faculty Life Cycle
• Honors and Awards
• Leadership Development Opportunities for Faculty
• Policies & Governance
• Professional Development

Getting Promoted to Associate Professor

• First Online: 03 March 2021

Cite this chapter

• Christina Y. Weng 3  

321 Accesses

Academic promotion to Associate Professor is an important milestone in one’s academic career. The number of women who hold upper-level faculty ranks is disproportionately lower than the number of full-time women faculty in US medical schools. Because the promotions process is quite involved and can take 6–12 months from the point of initiation, careful planning is necessary. It is important to build a strong portfolio of work that includes publications, research abstracts, invited lectures, awards, and leadership roles. Keep your curriculum vitae updated at all times, and set aside all evaluations and positive feedback received for your work. A faculty member’s readiness for promotion should be jointly determined by the candidate and her chairperson. Once a timeline has been established, start composing your dossier. Utilize resources offered by the institution, and carefully review requirements before starting. Seeking advice and guidance from senior colleagues can be invaluable. Set aside plenty of time to request materials that rely on others’ schedules, such as letters of support and institutional forms. Authors of your letters should be able to attest to your contributions and future potential. After your dossier is completed and proofread, your chairperson will submit it to the promotions committee. Your chair will present you to the committee on a pre-determined date, and a decision will be rendered and pushed to the Board of Trustees for sign-off. Following your successful promotion to Associate Professor, remember to thank all the staff, letter writers, mentors, and colleagues who assisted you through this process.

• Associate professor
• Curriculum vitae
• Women faculty
• Ophthalmology

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Cain JP, Stevenson DK. How to create your package for promotion. In: Roberts LW, editor. The academic medicine handbook. New York: Springer-Verlag; 2013. p. 357–67.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Vitreoretinal Diseases & Surgery, Department of Ophthalmology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA

Christina Y. Weng

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Department of Ophthalmology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA

Bascom Palmer Eye Institute, University of Miami Hospital, Miami, FL, USA

Audina M. Berrocal

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Weng, C.Y. (2021). Getting Promoted to Associate Professor. In: Weng, C.Y., Berrocal, A.M. (eds) Women in Ophthalmology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-59335-3_32

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-59335-3_32

Published : 03 March 2021

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-59334-6

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-59335-3

eBook Packages : Medicine Medicine (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research