Information Guide for Appointments,
Promotion, and Tenure (APT)
Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine
March 13, 2024
This guide was originally issued in December of 2011 and is updated periodically. Updated versions were issued on February 6,
2013; November 11, 2013; March 25, 2014; May 6, 2014; June 12, 2014; December 4, 2014; July 7, 2015; August 26, 2015;
September 1, 2016; April 10, 2017; January 2, 2018; August 13, 2019; April 13, 2020; August 17, 2020; December 14, 2020;
February 24, 2021; March 17, 2021; April 11, 2022; March 24, 2023; August 15, 2023; March 13, 2024.
Faculty Affairs Office
420 East Superior Street
Chicago, Illinois 60611
fao@northwestern.edu
Information Guide for APT
2
Table of Contents
A. Overview ................................................................................................................................................... 3
B. Appointments ............................................................................................................................................ 3
1. Full and Part-time Faculty Appointments ............................................................................................. 3
2. Initial Appointment and Reappointment of Instructors ........................................................................ 4
3. Initial Appointment and Reappointment of Assistant Professors ......................................................... 4
4. Categories of Faculty Tracks in the Feinberg School of Medicine ......................................................... 5
C. Expectations of the Tenured Faculty at FSM ............................................................................................. 8
D. Promotions ................................................................................................................................................ 9
E. Evaluative Criteria for Promotion ............................................................................................................ 15
1. Investigator Track (tenure track) ......................................................................................................... 16
2. Clinician-Educator (non-tenure track) ................................................................................................. 17
3. Team Scientist Track (non-tenure track) .............................................................................................. 21
4. Research faculty (non-tenure track) .................................................................................................... 23
5. Health System Clinician (non-tenure track) …………………………………………………………………………………………..24
F. Common Reasons for Failing to Achieve Promotion ............................................................................... 26
G. Recommendation for New Appointment
................................................................................................ 27
H. Reappointment/Promotion Recommendation and Criteria for Promotion ............................................ 28
Appendices .................................................................................................................................................. 32
Document Templates and Forms ............................................................................................................. 32
Table 1: Faculty Dossiers for Promotion to Indicated Ranks ................................................................... 33
Table 2: Faculty Dossiers for New Appointments .................................................................................... 34
Table 3: Domains of Activity on the Clinician-Educator and Health System Clinician Tracks and
Examples of Accomplishments ................................................................................................................ 35
Table 4: Domains of Activity on the Team Scientist Career Track and Examples of Accomplishments. 37
Figures ..................................................................................................................................................... 38
Information Guide for APT
3
A. Overview
The Appointments, Promotion, and Tenure (APT) Committee advises the Dean regarding
recommendations for appointment, reappointment, and promotion, including the award of tenure. The
APT Committee also acts as an advisory committee to Department Chairs regarding the academic
progress and performance of individual faculty on the tenure track who have not yet been awarded
tenure.
The Vice Dean for Academic Affairs selects the members of the APT Committee from among full
professors who are tenured and non-tenured at the Feinberg School of Medicine. The term of service is
5 years, with ~20% of members rotating off each year. The committee is composed of 18 members,
including the Committee Chair. Representatives from the Office for Faculty Affairs serve as non-voting
members of the committee and liaisons to the Dean's office, to record all decisions, and develop
documents as needed for further action. Members are selected to ensure distribution of members
across departments, representation of clinical and basic science departments, and an appropriate
distribution of gender and diversity.
The Faculty Affairs Office receives dossiers from departments for candidates being recommended for
new appointments or promotion. Typically, departmental administrators or their delegates work with
faculty members and Chairs to develop the dossier containing the necessary appointment or promotion
documents (see Tables 1-2). The APT Committee meets monthly, September through May, and as
needed at the request of the Faculty Affairs Office, and reviews recommendations for new
appointments and promotions at the level of Associate Professor and Professor. The APT Committee
votes on these recommendations, and their recommendation and report for each candidate are
forwarded to the Dean of the School of Medicine for approval. The Dean’s recommendation is then
forwarded to the Provost’s Office for approval. An overview of the evaluation and approval process for
faculty at different ranks and on different tracks is provided in Figures 1-3.
This process has evolved over time and will continue to do so as use suggests thoughtful revision. A
summary of the required documents for new appointments and promotions for faculty in all of the
different tracks is found in Tables 1-2. Nothing in this document is intended to override the terms of
employment and policies as set forth in the Faculty Handbook at Northwestern University.
B. Appointments
1. Full and Part-time Faculty Appointments
Individuals who receive one hundred percent of their professional compensation for all professional and
academic service from Northwestern University or any combination of entities approved by the medical
school and University, whose primary base of clinical, academic and educational activity is located on
the Chicago campus, and whose effort constitutes 1.0 FTE
1
may be recommended for a full-time regular
1
The number of work hours required for a 1.0 FTE position is determined by the approved entity that employs the faculty
member and pays their salary but cannot be less than 35 hours per week to qualify for full-time status at Northwestern
University Feinberg School of Medicine.
Information Guide for APT
4
faculty appointment and must continue to meet these requirements to retain such an
appointment. Designation of an approved entity requires Dean’s office review and approval. Full-time
appointments also require that an authorized University faculty search process identifies the appointee
or that the University approves a waiver of search.
Faculty appointments for individuals who receive all their professional compensation from the
university or approved entities and whose effort is less than 1.0 FTE are classified as part-time
appointments. Individuals who receive the majority of their total professional compensation from the
University, or an entity approved by the University and medical school, for specific, limited academic
services are also classified as part-time. It is generally expected that a part-time faculty appointment at
Northwestern University will be an individual’s primary job. Those who contribute effort less than 1.0
FTE to the university and hold a primary job at another institution will typically be appointed to the
adjunct faculty. Paid adjunct appointments cannot exceed 0.49 FTE.
2. Initial Appointment and Reappointment of Instructors
Fellows transitioning to faculty positions and others early in their academic career may be appointed to
the rank of Instructor with the recommendation of the Department Chair (see example Chair
Recommendation #1) and approval of the Dean and Provost. This is a 1-year appointment with annual
renewal as requested by the Department. An appointment as Instructor does not require review by the
APT Committee. Appointments at the rank of Instructor are always non-tenure-eligible and occur on
either the Clinician-Educator track or an undifferentiated career track, with the latter allowing the
candidate to declare a track within the first three years of appointment or at the time of promotion to
Assistant Professor, whichever is earlier.
3. Initial Appointment and Reappointment of Assistant Professors
The Chair of a Department will recommend a first appointment at the Assistant Professor level (see
example Chair Recommendation #1). Initial appointments and reappointments will be made in the track
that is most appropriate for that individual. The initial term of appointment for Assistant Professors is 3
years with annual reappointment by the Department Chair until promotion. Faculty may request a
change in tracks following consultation with their Department Chair. Changing tracks may be justified
when an individual has changed the portion of time spent in research, clinical activity, or teaching.
Changing from the tenure-eligible track should occur no less than 3 years before the end of the tenure
probationary period. Changing from the non-tenure-eligible Clinician-Educator or Team Scientist tracks
to the tenure-eligible Investigator track requires approval from the School of Medicine and Provost.
Decisions to not reappoint require a letter to the faculty member from the Chair describing the timing of
the remaining appointment; faculty on an annual reappointment cycle require 4 months written notice
and faculty on 3-year reappointment cycles require 1 year notice in writing. The school will usually
accommodate late decisions where the decision not to reappoint requires a few months extension of
the previous appointment.
The APT Committee reviews tenure-eligible Assistant Professors at the end of their 3
rd
and 6
th
years of
appointment. The review by the APT Committee is intended to be advisory to the faculty member and
his/her Chair and to provide feedback about a faculty member’s career development and progress. An
important purpose of the review is to help the candidate remedy any deficiencies before the next
Information Guide for APT
5
review. The language of the report is intended to be supportive and informative, but the content of the
report must convey issues that both the candidate and career mentor can evaluate and find useful in
preparing for subsequent reviews. Based on its review of the faculty member’s dossier, the APT
Committee may suggest considering a change in track. A written report of the review is provided to
both the faculty member and Department Chair.
4. Categories of Faculty Tracks in the Feinberg School of Medicine
The Feinberg School of Medicine will appoint and advance faculty in one of five promotion tracks (one
tenure and four non-tenure) or appoint as adjunct faculty. These tracks identify career pathways that
satisfy the intellectual and teaching diversity of needed faculty as well as serve as a framework for
academic success. Faculty members should be guided by the expectations of a particular track.
Department Chairs are responsible for recommending appointment or reappointment of faculty to a
particular track and reviewing the appropriateness of that track during regular intervals of faculty
evaluation at the department level. For faculty engaged in clinical practice, continuance of the faculty
appointment is typically dependent upon maintaining professional licensure and remaining a
practitioner in good standing at the clinical organizations (e.g., hospitals, clinics, practice plans) in which
one participates as assigned by the faculty member’s department chair, unless an exception is
requested of and approved by the medical school. The different faculty tracks with guidelines for the
typical distribution of effort on each are as follows.
Investigator Track
o Scientist pathway (PhDs, 80-90% Research, 10-20% Education/Service)
o Physician-Scientist pathway (80% Research, 20% Clinical/Education/Service)
Faculty who spend the majority of their time in extramural-funded research with the intent to develop
independent research programs are assigned to the Investigator Track and appointed with the intention
of promotion to Associate Professor or Professor with tenure according to School policy. Faculty in this
track will be titled as Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, or Professor. This is a tenure track and
faculty recruited for appointment at the level of Associate Professor or Professor will normally have
tenure at their current institution. Occasionally, based on unique circumstances, appointments of
recruited faculty at the level of Associate Professor are made without tenure, allowing for tenure
conversion at a later date.
Clinician-Educator Track (80% Clinical, 20% Education/Administration/Research
/Service/Community Engagement)
This track is for faculty who contribute to the clinical, educational, research, and/or community
engagement missions of the medical school but whose major effort is in the areas of clinical practice,
practice-related activities, and/or education. Clinical faculty who spend the majority of their time in
clinical practice or practice-related activities, but also perform some clinical or community-engaged
research, should also be appointed in this track. Faculty in this track will be titled as Instructor, Assistant
Professor, Associate Professor, or Professor. This is a non-tenure track.
Historically, FSM granted contributed services faculty appointments, but no longer grants new
appointments of this type. However, those who were initially appointed as contributed services faculty
Information Guide for APT
6
retain those appointments and are eligible for promotion. Contributed services faculty members are
appointed to the Clinician-Educator track. They are clinical practitioners who typically are in the private
practice of medicine and practice within the McGaw Medical Center. Contributed services faculty
members contribute to the academic mission of the medical school without compensation by teaching
medical students, residents, and fellows and performing other activities. Departments provide
expectations for contributions to the academic mission by contributed services faculty. Faculty in this
track will be titled using their rank preceded by the word “clinical”: Clinical Instructor, Clinical Assistant
Professor, Clinical Associate Professor, or Clinical Professor. This is a non-tenure track.
Team Scientist Track (variable amounts of effort distributed between research and education
depending upon domain of activity)
This track is for non-clinical faculty who make substantial contributions to the research and/or
educational missions of the medical school. Faculty members whose primary activity is in research will
typically engage in team science. Their skills, expertise and/or effort play a vital role in obtaining,
sustaining and implementing programmatic research. Faculty on this track often have expertise in
epidemiology, clinical trials, biostatistics, biomedical informatics, outcomes research or other qualitative
and quantitative research methodologies and generally contribute to clinical studies, patient-oriented
clinical outcomes research, community-engaged research, population-based studies and/or basic
science research. Typically such faculty provide critical expertise to a program or group of research
teams as a co-investigator with contributions that do not necessarily require or result in independent
grant funding, but some faculty on this track may serve as principal investigator on related research.
Faculty on this track do not perform clinical work but do contribute to the education and service
missions of the medical school. While most members of this track make research the major focus of
their activity, for some members of this track education may be the major focus of their activity. Faculty
focusing on education are typically recognized as outstanding educators and contribute to course
development, degree program leadership, and other innovative educational products. Faculty rank in
this track will be titled Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, or Professor. This is a non-tenure-eligible
regular faculty track.
Research Track/PhD or MD (100% Research):
Faculty without clinical or substantial teaching responsibilities in the laboratory, who spend most of
their time in research activities, will be appointed to the Research track. Faculty in this track typically
support research efforts of investigators on the Investigator and Clinician-Educator tracks or play a
leadership role in the operations of core facilities. Faculty in this track will be titled as Research
Assistant Professor, Research Associate Professor, or Research Professor. This is a non-tenure track.
Health System Clinician (up to 100% Clinical):
Faculty appointed in this track by departments are full-time and part-time clinicians who contribute to
the mission of the medical school and practice in affiliated hospitals or clinics. These faculty support the
clinical mission of our academic healthcare system and while their major effort is in clinical practice and
practice-related activities, they also participate in educational, research, or other activities within their
designated areas of interest when requested by the department. Health System Clinician (HSC)
Information Guide for APT
7
appointments with hospital privileges at Northwestern Memorial Hospital, Lurie Children’s Hospital, and
Shirley Ryan AbilityLab are specially designated HSC/NMH, HSC/LCH, and HSC/SRAL, respectively, and
can only be granted by both approval of the hospital in question and the school.
Health System Clinicians are typically employed by affiliated clinical entities such as the clinical practice
plans of Northwestern Medicine, the Pediatric Faculty Foundation, Shirley Ryan AbilityLab, or their
hospitals, as they exist from time to time, but some clinicians may be in private practice. These clinical
entities will provide oversight regarding the clinical performance of Health System Clinicians with
admitting privileges. Departments will be responsible for evaluating the academic education and
scholarship of their Health System Clinicians desiring promotion. Faculty in this track will complete annual
conflict of interest surveys provided by the University as well as pursue continuing medical education,
earning at least enough credits to maintain licensure. Health System Clinician appointments are unpaid by
the University and non-tenure eligible. Faculty in this track will be titled using their rank preceded by the
word “clinical”: Clinical Instructor, Clinical Assistant Professor, Clinical Associate Professor, or Clinical
Professor.
Adjunct faculty (part-time or non-salary)
Faculty who hold a primary appointment at another institution or organization and remain based at that
institution or organization but who contribute to the academic mission of the medical school will be
appointed as adjunct faculty. These faculty will be titled as Adjunct Instructor, Adjunct Assistant
Professor, Adjunct Associate Professor, or Adjunct Professor (typically determined by the rank of their
primary appointment). This is a non-tenure track.
Adjunct appointment typically involves a greater level of involvement at the university beyond scientific
collaboration, including activities such as:
1.
Holding an active grant that is administered through Northwestern (this does not include
holding a subcontract that is part of a grant awarded to Northwestern)
2.
Continuing to mentor a graduate student who was in the faculty member’s laboratory and is
completing their training at Northwestern as opposed to moving to the faculty member’s new
institution
3.
Actively contributing to the educational mission of Northwestern by filling a teaching need
identified by Northwestern and approved by the Department Chair or her/his designee
For faculty members who are granted an adjunct appointment for the first two reasons, the adjunct
appointment would typically end once the grant has finished or the graduate student has completed
their training. For #3, the appointment would typically end once the need for teaching has ended.
Emeritus faculty
Appointment as emeritus faculty is an honor bestowed upon retiring faculty who have achieved
distinction in their field—typically receiving recognition beyond the University—and whose special
accomplishments have helped Feinberg achieve one or more of its various missions, have brought
distinction to the medical school, or for those who plan to contribute to the mission of the school in one
or more meaningful ways after retiring.
Information Guide for APT
8
Eligibility for emeritus status is typically reserved for faculty members who will be retired fully from their
academic position, are aged 55 or older, and have a minimum of 10 years of continuous service to
Northwestern at the time of retirement.
Application for emeritus status is made using the Request for Emeritus Appointment form and requires
approval of the Department Chair, Dean, Provost, and Board of Trustees. This request should typically
be submitted when a faculty member announces their intention to retire.
Qualification for emeritus status requires evidence of longstanding contributions to the education,
research, and/or clinical missions of the medical school with evidence of national recognition for one’s
accomplishments; evidence of significant service to the medical school and/or University communities;
and plans for ongoing contributions to the teaching and/or research missions of the medical school.
Because part-time and adjunct faculty typically have significant professional responsibilities outside the
medical school and University, they will generally not have achieved a record of service specific to
Northwestern to warrant appointment to emeritus status.
Emeritus faculty can be paid for full-time or part-time university service after retirement, but with
respect to benefits, they are considered retirees, not paid employees.
C. Expectations of the Tenured Faculty at FSM
The Northwestern University Faculty Handbook states:
“Because of the many scholarly and professional enterprises represented at Northwestern, the
University does not provide a common standard for faculty productivity. Faculty members are
responsible for being active and productive in creative, artistic, scholarly, and research pursuits
appropriate to their respective fields. Descriptions of expectations of faculty productivity should be
provided by the school in concert with the department of the faculty member.”
The award of tenure at the Feinberg School of Medicine is granted based upon the likelihood of a faculty
member having a sustained impact in his or her chosen field of investigation. Key elements of this
decision include a faculty member’s record of academic and scholarly achievement, including high-
impact publications, evidence of national recognition, and a strong history of extramural funding.
Contributions to the educational and/or clinical missions of the school as well as service are also
important ancillary determinants in a tenure decision. The award of tenure is conferred with an ongoing
expectation of superb accomplishment and commitment to supporting salary through faculty effort.
Minimal expectations of tenure at the Feinberg School of Medicine include:
• Maintenance of a robust, cutting-edge research program supported by extramural funding. It is
an understanding that faculty members will continue to seek extramural support for their salary
and research effort.
• Continued contribution to the biomedical research literature.
• Continued contributions to the education of medical and graduate students and other trainees.
• Continued service to the school and University upon request. This would include service on
Information Guide for APT
9
departmental, school, and University-wide committees; mentorship; or other activities as
available through the school or the University.
• Accomplishing all of these activities in full compliance with all University policies and
governmental regulations.
During a faculty member’s career at Northwestern, the proportion of effort devoted to research,
teaching, administrative and/or clinical activities should not vary from that expected at the time tenure
is conferred. Annual salary determinations are linked to the expectation of sustained academic
productivity. It is the responsibility of the faculty member to remain fully engaged in these pursuits. Any
changes in expected effort are made only with the approval of the Department Chair and the School of
Medicine.
D. Promotions
The departmental APT committee and Chair initiate the promotion process in time to allow for
thoughtful evaluation of consistency and achievement as they relate to guidelines for the School of
Medicine. Requirements for the dossier are track-dependent and described in Table 1. Figures 1-3
provide an overview of the process.
Promotion to Associate Professor without the award of tenure in the Investigator track
Promotion in the Investigator track, on rare occasion, is requested without award of tenure, prior to the
end of the probationary period. Promotion to Associate Professor without the award of tenure is
generally discouraged, as tenure conversion at the end of the probationary period will generally occur
after having been in rank as an Assistant Professor for a period of time that allows for the creation of a
coherent and substantial body of investigation at the time of promotion to Associate Professor (see
example Chair Recommendation #2).
For actions to the level of Associate Professor without the award of tenure on the Investigator track, the
Department will prepare a dossier consisting of a curriculum vitae and personal statement, a Chair
Recommendation (see example Chair Recommendation #2) and assent of the Departmental APT
Committee where such committees exist, documentation of teaching, listing of critical references, and
letters from at least six outside referees, based upon a list of names provided by the candidate and
solicited by the Department, which can advise the APT Committee on the exceptional qualities of the
candidate. It is expected that as part of the dossier, the Chair’s letter will include information related to
the candidate’s teaching, including comprehensive teaching records as well as evaluations from students,
residents, and fellows (as appropriate). Of the six letters mentioned above, all should be from peer
institutions outside Northwestern University and all evaluators should be at a rank higher than the
candidate. Letters from external referees in the individual’s field will address the candidate’s academic
attributes. All of the outside referees must be individuals who know the individual through his/her work
alone, rather than through personal contact, defined as having worked at the same institution, having
collaborated, or having been in a mentor, co-worker, or a student relationship. Candidates and mentors
should not contact these individuals. Such letters will evaluate the candidate’s educational or scholarly
contributions, independence, professional reputation, teaching, and/or clinical abilities. The APT
Committee will then make a recommendation regarding promotion. A report of the APT Committee’s
Information Guide for APT
10
review, deliberations, and vote will be prepared and forwarded along with the candidate’s dossier for
review and approval by the Dean. The recommendation of the Dean will be forwarded to the Provost’s
office for final approval.
Promotion to Associate Professor with Tenure and to Professor with Tenure in the
Investigator track
Candidates for promotion to Associate Professor will generally have been in rank as an Assistant
Professor for a period of time that allows for the creation of a coherent and substantial body of
investigation at the time of promotion to Associate Professor with tenure (see example Chair
Recommendation #2). Associate Professors being promoted to Professor will typically have been in rank
as an Associate Professor for a period of additional time prior to promotion to allow for further
development of their research career and international identity.
The standard probationary period for the award of tenure is 9 years at Feinberg. The recommendation
of the School of Medicine to the Provost must be completed no later than the end of the 9th year of
appointment. The school’s promotion process takes approximately 12 months, so promotion with the
award of tenure must be planned well before a mandatory end of the probationary period. The
probationary period is set to 9 years so that a determination can be made whether faculty will remain
high performers as tenured faculty. Therefore, the early award of tenure should be a rare event. For the
early award of tenure, there is an expectation that faculty will have accomplished in a shorter period of
time what is expected during a full 9-year probationary period. As described above, tenure is awarded
to faculty who demonstrate a high likelihood for continuing to perform high impact research on into the
future. This is typically evaluated based on three metrics of past performance that help to ensure future
success: (i) publication history, (ii) current and past grant funding, and (iii) establishing a national
reputation. In terms of publication history, there is not a requirement for a specific number of
publications, rather the impact, quality, and quantity of the publications are evaluated. There is an
expectation that faculty will have produced an impactful body of work based on work accomplished as
an independent investigator. For grant funding, faculty will typically have renewed or be on a second
round of grant funding and will generally be principal investigator on at least 2 major grant awards (NIH
R01 or equivalent) at the time that tenure is awarded. Examples of activities that demonstrate a national
reputation include receipt of honors and awards, invitations to speak at national meetings and other
institutions, and service on grant review panels, editorial boards, or related activities. Contributions of
citizenship to the medical school and/or university are also expected beyond these three major areas of
evaluation.
For actions to the level of Associate Professor with tenure or Professor with tenure, the department will
prepare a dossier consisting of a curriculum vitae, personal statement from the candidate outlining his
or her accomplishments and future plans, a Chair Recommendation (see example Chair
Recommendation #2) and assent of the Departmental APT Committee where such committees exist,
listing of critical references, documentation of teaching, and a list of four external referees from the
candidate’s field of research who can be solicited for letters to comment on the candidate’s academic
attributes, impact on the field, and appropriateness for the proposed rank and tenure status. It is
expected that as part of the dossier, the Chair’s recommendation will include information related to the
candidate’s teaching, including comprehensive teaching records as well as evaluations from students,
residents, and fellows (as appropriate). The external referees should be from peer institutions outside
Northwestern University and all should be at a rank higher than the candidate. All the outside referees
Information Guide for APT
11
must be individuals who know the individual through his/her work alone, rather than through personal
contact, defined as having worked at the same institution, having collaborated, or having been in a
mentor, co-worker, or a student relationship. Candidates and mentors should not contact these
individuals, as the FSM Faculty Affairs Office will solicit these letters. The letters from external referees
will evaluate the candidate’s scholarly contributions, independence, professional reputation, impact on
the field, and teaching and/or clinical abilities.
After receipt of the candidate’s dossier in the Dean’s office, the Vice Dean for Academic Affairs will
assign an Ad Hoc Committee to undertake the initial level of review of the dossier. The committee will
consist of tenured faculty members outside the candidate’s department who are at a rank higher than
the candidate. The Ad Hoc Committee will provide the names of an additional five referees from peer
institutions outside of Northwestern University who can comment on the candidate’s scholarly
contributions, independence, professional reputation, impact on the field, and teaching and/or clinical
abilities. The FSM Faculty Affairs Office will also solicit these letters for the candidate’s dossier.
The Ad Hoc Committee will review the final dossier and make a recommendation regarding promotion
and/or the award of tenure. This recommendation of the Ad Hoc Committee will be added to the
dossier, which will then be reviewed by the Feinberg School of Medicine APT Committee. The APT
Committee will make a recommendation regarding promotion and/or the award of tenure. A report of
the APT Committee’s review, deliberations, and vote will be prepared and forwarded along with the
candidate’s dossier for review and approval by the Dean. The recommendation of the Dean will be
forwarded to the Provost for final approval.
Promotion to Associate Professor in the non-tenure-eligible Clinician-Educator track
Candidates will generally have been at least 6 years in rank as an Assistant Professor at the time of
promotion to Associate Professor. For actions to the level of Associate Professor on the Clinician-
Educator track, the Department will prepare a dossier consisting of a curriculum vitae and personal
statement, a Chair Recommendation (see example Chair Recommendation #3) and assent of the
Departmental APT Committee where such committees exist, documentation of teaching, listing of
critical references, and letters from at least six outside referees, based upon a list of names provided
by the candidate and solicited by the Department, which can advise the APT Committee on the
exceptional qualities of the candidate. It is expected that as part of the dossier, the Chair’s letter will
include information related to the candidate’s teaching, including comprehensive teaching records as
well as evaluations from students, residents, and fellows (as appropriate). Of the six letters mentioned
above all should be from peer institutions outside Northwestern University and all evaluators should
be at a rank higher than the candidate. Letters from external referees in the individual’s field will
address the candidate’s academic attributes and, for clinicians, their clinical accomplishments. All of
the outside referees must be individuals who know the individual through his/her work alone, rather
than through personal contact, defined as having worked at the same institution, having collaborated,
or having been in a mentor, co-worker, or a student relationship. Candidates and mentors should not
contact these individuals. The letters will evaluate the candidate’s educational or scholarly
contributions, professional reputation, teaching, and/or clinical abilities. Candidates who conduct
research in direct collaboration with community leaders or organizations, are engaged in the
development of community-based clinical programs, address public policy, and/or support community
awareness programs are permitted to provide the department with the names of up to 3 additional
individuals who would be qualified to contribute one additional letter as a community referee.
Information Guide for APT
12
Community referees may include community partners who are not academics by training, but who are
experienced consumers of applied research and use academic scholarship for policy or organizational
ends and/or are community leaders who manage and benefit from community clinical programs. The
purpose of the additional community referee letter will be to verify and describe specifically how the
candidate’s research, clinical programs and/or other scholarly contributions have benefitted the
community by informing or guiding changes in policy or practice, or having other direct benefits from a
community perspective. The APT Committee will review the final dossier of the candidate and make a
recommendation regarding promotion. A report of the APT Committee’s review, deliberations, and
vote will be prepared and forwarded along with the candidate’s dossier for review and approval by the
Dean. The recommendation of the Dean will be forwarded to the Provost’s office for final approval.
Promotion to Full Professor in the non-tenure eligible Clinician-Educator track
Candidates will usually have been at least 5 years in rank as an Associate Professor at the time of
promotion to Professor. For actions to the level of Professor on the Clinician-Educator track, the
department will prepare a dossier consisting of a curriculum vitae and personal statement, information
related to the candidate’s teaching, including comprehensive teaching records as well as evaluations
from students, residents, and fellows (as appropriate), a Chair Recommendation (see example Chair
Recommendation #3) and assent of the Departmental APT Committee where such committees exist,
documentation of teaching, listing of critical references, and letters from at least six outside referees,
based upon a list of names provided by the candidate and solicited by the Department, which can advise
the APT Committee on the exceptional qualities of the candidate. Of the six referees mentioned above,
all should be from peer institutions outside Northwestern University and at a rank higher than the
candidate. Letters from external referees in the individual’s field will address the candidate’s academic
attributes and, for clinicians, their clinical accomplishments. All of the outside referees must be
individuals who know the individual through his/her work alone, rather than through personal contact,
defined as having worked at the same institution, having collaborated, or having been in a mentor, co-
worker, or a student relationship. Candidates and mentors should not contact these individuals.
Candidates who conduct research in direct collaboration with community leaders or organizations, are
engaged in the development of community-based clinical programs, address public policy, and/or
support community awareness programs are permitted to provide the department with the names of up
to three additional individuals who would be qualified to contribute one additional letter as a
community referee. Community referees may include community partners who are not academics by
training, but who are experienced consumers of applied research and use academic scholarship for
policy or organizational ends and/or are community leaders in who manage and benefit from
community clinical programs. The purpose of the additional community referee letter will be to verify
and describe specifically how the candidate’s research, clinical programs and/or other scholarly
contributions have benefitted the community by informing or guiding changes in policy or practice, or
having other direct benefits from a community perspective. The APT Committee will review the final
dossier of the candidate and make a recommendation regarding promotion. A report of the APT
Committee’s review, deliberations, and vote will be prepared and forwarded along with the candidate’s
dossier for review and approval by the Dean. The recommendation of the Dean will be forwarded to the
Provost’s office for final approval.
Information Guide for APT
13
Promotion to Associate Professor in the non-tenure eligible Team Scientist track
Candidates will generally have been at least 6 years in rank as an Assistant Professor at the time of
promotion to Associate Professor. Faculty will declare a major domain of activity, either research or
education, at the time of appointment. For actions to the level of Associate Professor on the Team
Scientist track, the Department will prepare a dossier consisting of a curriculum vitae and personal
statement; a Chair Recommendation (see example Chair Recommendation #4) which includes
information related to the candidate’s research, teaching, and other academic activities, and assent of
the Departmental APT Committee where such committees exist; a letter from at least one program
leader documenting the unique collaborative contribution of the faculty member to programmatic
research, including grants and manuscripts (for faculty whose domain is research); documentation of
teaching; listing of critical references; and letters from at least six outside referees, based upon a list of
names provided by the candidate and solicited by the Department, which can advise the APT Committee
on the exceptional qualities of the candidate. It is expected that as part of the dossier, the Chair’s letter
will include information related to the candidate’s teaching, including comprehensive teaching records
as well as evaluations from students when available. Of the six letters mentioned above, all should be
from peer institutions outside Northwestern University and all evaluators should be at a rank higher
than the candidate. Letters from external referees in the individual’s field will address the candidate’s
academic attributes. All of the outside referees must be individuals who know the individual through
his/her work alone, rather than through personal contact, defined as having worked at the same
institution, having collaborated, or having been in a mentor, co-worker, or a student relationship.
Candidates and mentors should not contact these individuals. The letters will evaluate the candidate’s
educational or scholarly contributions, professional reputation, research and/or teaching abilities. The
APT Committee will review the final dossier of the candidate and make a recommendation regarding
promotion. A report of the APT Committee’s review, deliberations, and vote will be prepared and
forwarded along with the candidate’s dossier for review and approval by the Dean. The
recommendation of the Dean will be forwarded to the Provost’s office for final approval.
Promotion to Full Professor in the non-tenure eligible Team Scientist track
Candidates will usually have been at least 5 years in rank as an Associate Professor at the time of
promotion to Professor. Faculty will declare a major domain of activity, either research or education, at
the time of appointment. For actions to the level of Professor on the Team Scientist track, the
department will prepare a dossier consisting of a curriculum vitae and personal statement; a Chair
Recommendation (see example Chair Recommendation #4) which includes information related to the
candidate’s research, teaching, and other academic activities, and assent of the Departmental APT
Committee where such committees exist; a letter from at least one program leader documenting the
unique collaborative contribution of the faculty member to programmatic research, including grants and
manuscripts (for faculty whose domain is research); documentation of teaching; listing of critical
references; and letters from at least six outside referees, based upon a list of names provided by the
candidate and solicited by the Department, which can advise the APT Committee on the exceptional
qualities of the candidate. Of the six referees mentioned above, all should be from peer institutions
outside Northwestern University and at a rank higher than the candidate. Letters from external referees
in the individual’s field will address the candidate’s academic attributes. All of the outside referees must
be individuals who know the individual through his/her work alone, rather than through personal contact,
defined as having worked at the same institution, having collaborated, or having been in a mentor, co-
worker, or a student relationship. Candidates and mentors should not contact these individuals. The APT
Information Guide for APT
14
Committee will review the final dossier of the candidate and make a recommendation regarding
promotion. A report of the APT Committee’s review, deliberations, and vote will be prepared and
forwarded along with the candidate’s dossier for review and approval by the Dean. The recommendation
of the Dean will be forwarded to the Provost’s office for final approval.
Promotion to Associate Professor or Full Professor on the Research Track
For actions to the level of Research Associate Professor or Research Professor, the Department will
prepare a dossier consisting of a curriculum vitae; a Chair Recommendation (see example Chair
Recommendation #5) and assent of the Departmental APT Committee where such committees exist; a
letter from at least one program leader (i.e., principal investigator or director of core facility)
documenting the unique collaborative contribution of the faculty member to programmatic research
and/or describing how the candidate’s activities contribute to research excellence at the Feinberg
School of Medicine or contribute to the excellence and impact of a research support facility; listing of
critical references; and letters from at least four outside referees, based upon a list of names provided
by the candidate and solicited by the Department, which can advise the APT Committee on the
exceptional qualities of the candidate. The letters should be from peer institutions outside
Northwestern University, and all referees should be at a rank higher than the candidate. Letters from
external referees in the individual’s field will address the candidate’s academic attributes and research
accomplishments. Candidates and mentors should not contact these individuals. The letters will
evaluate the candidate’s scholarly contributions and professional reputation. The APT Committee will
review the candidate’s dossier and make a recommendation regarding promotion. A report of the APT
Committee’s review, deliberations, and vote will be prepared and forwarded along with the candidate’s
dossier for review and approval by the Dean. The recommendation of the Dean will be forwarded to the
Provost’s office for final approval.
Promotion to Associate Professor in the non-tenure-eligible Health System Clinician track
Candidates will generally have been at least 6 years in rank as a Clinical Assistant Professor at the time
of promotion to Clinical Associate Professor. For actions to the level of Clinical Associate Professor on
the Health System Clinician track, the Department will prepare a dossier consisting of a curriculum
vitae and personal statement, a Chair Recommendation (see example Chair Recommendation #6) and
assent of the Departmental APT Committee where such committees exist, documentation of clinical
impact and scholarship, listing of critical references (when research is an area of concentration, and
letters from at least three referees external to their practice/institution, based upon a list of names
provided by the candidate and solicited by the Department, which can advise the school on the
qualities of the candidate. It is expected that as part of the dossier, the Chair’s letter will include
information related to the candidate’s clinical duties, performance, and citizenship. Of the three letters
mentioned above all should be from peers outside their practice/institution and all evaluators should
be at a rank higher than the candidate. Letters from external referees in the individual’s field will
address the candidate’s academic attributes and, for clinicians, their clinical accomplishments. All the
outside referees must be individuals who know the individual through his/her work alone. The letters
will evaluate the candidate’s scholarly contributions, professional reputation, and/or clinical abilities.
Candidates who conduct research in direct collaboration with community leaders or organizations, are
engaged in the development of community-based clinical programs, address public policy, and/or
support community awareness programs are permitted to provide the department with the names of
Information Guide for APT
15
up to 3 additional individuals who would be qualified to contribute one additional letter as a
community referee. Community referees may include community partners who are not academics by
training, but who are experienced consumers of applied research and use academic scholarship for
policy or organizational ends and/or are community leaders who manage and benefit from community
clinical programs. The purpose of the additional community referee letter will be to verify and describe
specifically how the candidate’s research, clinical programs and/or other contributions have benefitted
the community by informing or guiding changes in policy or practice or having other direct benefits
from a community perspective. A special subcommittee of the APT, designated by the Vice Dean for
Faculty Affairs, will review the final dossiers of the candidates and make recommendations regarding
promotion to the FSM APT Committee. The APT Committee Chair and Co-Chair will review the
recommendations and forward the candidate’s dossiers for approval by the Dean. The
recommendation of the Dean will be forwarded to the Provost’s office for final approval.
Promotion to Full Professor in the non-tenure eligible Health System Clinician track
Candidates will usually have been at least 5 years in rank as a Clinical Associate Professor at the time of
promotion to Clinical Professor. For actions to the level of Clinical Professor on the Health System
Clinician track, the department will prepare a dossier consisting of a curriculum vitae and personal
statement, information related to the candidate’s clinical and professional performance, a Chair
Recommendation (see example Chair Recommendation #6) and assent of the Departmental APT
Committee where such committees exist, documentation of clinical impact and scholarship, listing of
critical references (when research is an area of concentration), and letters from at least three outside
referees, based upon a list of names provided by the candidate and solicited by the Department, which
can advise the school on the exceptional qualities of the candidate. Of the three referees mentioned
above, all should be from peers external to the practice/hospital /institutions and at a rank higher than
the candidate. Letters from external referees in the individual’s field will address the candidate’s
academic attributes and, for clinicians, their clinical accomplishments. All the outside referees must be
individuals who know the individual through his/her work alone. Candidates who conduct research in
direct collaboration with community leaders or organizations, are engaged in the development of
community-based clinical programs, address public policy, and/or support community awareness
programs are permitted to provide the department with the names of up to three additional individuals
who would be qualified to contribute one additional letter as a community referee. Community
referees may include community partners who are not academics by training, but who are experienced
consumers of applied research and use academic scholarship for policy or organizational ends and/or
are community leaders in who manage and benefit from community clinical programs. The purpose of
the additional community referee letter will be to verify and describe specifically how the candidate’s
research, clinical programs and/or other contributions have benefitted the community by informing or
guiding changes in policy or practice or having other direct benefits from a community perspective. A
special subcommittee of the APT, designated by the Vice Dean for Faculty Affairs, will review the final
dossiers of the candidates, and make recommendations regarding promotion to the FSM APT
Committee. The APT Committee Chair and Co-Chair will review the recommendations and forward the
candidate’s dossiers for approval by the Dean. The recommendation of the Dean will be forwarded to
the Provost’s office for final approval.
E. Evaluative Criteria for Promotion
The main criteria for promotion are academic excellence, teaching, and clinical accomplishments where
Information Guide for APT
16
appropriate. Depending on the track, quality and impact of scholarly contributions (ISI citation
frequency, h-index, and quality of journals), membership in honorary organizations, awards, significant
contributions to professional organizations (such as service on study sections and editorial boards),
leadership roles in academic societies, exemplary clinical services, leadership in or contributions to
educational programs, teaching excellence, and grants are the major elements underlying the APT
Committee's recommendation. The Committee also recognizes and considers some less traditional
forms of academic scholarship that are important products of creative and rigorous community
engagement. Examples include written reports of community health needs or assets, community
workshops and presentations, technical reports, evidence-based practice guidelines, and policy
documents. Publications and presentations that are authored jointly with external community leaders
and partners are considered strong forms of community-engaged scholarship. Letters from outside
referees who evaluate academic accomplishments and impact on the field as reflected by evidence of
clinical, research, and/or educational impact and recognition are also considered carefully. The APT
Committee recognizes the highly individualized nature of academic careers and seeks to identify the
unique contributions of each faculty member it reviews.
1. Investigator Track (tenure track)
Associate Professor: Candidates must have a national reputation for outstanding independent work in
their area of scholarship. A series of excellent peer-reviewed articles in respected journals (as judged in
part by numbers of citations and quality of journals in which published) should tell a coherent story
about their research accomplished as an independent investigator. The successful candidate will have a
history of having been awarded several independent research grants, usually from the National
Institutes of Health or other federal agencies or nationally recognized foundations. At the time of the
award of tenure, the successful candidate will typically have renewed or be on a second round of grant
funding and will generally be principal investigator on at least 2 major grant awards (NIH R01 or
equivalent). Membership in elected research societies, contributions to professional organizations and
societies, invited presentations at national meetings, invited lectureships, and assessment by external
referees indicate the importance of the individual's research and his/her national reputation. A
candidate should have a record of excellence in teaching medical and/or graduate students and, where
appropriate, house officers and fellows. Those who are involved in patient care are expected to be
excellent clinicians.
Professor: Candidates will be among the top scholars in the country in their areas of expertise (as judged
in part by numbers of citations and quality of journals in which published), with an international
reputation for accomplishments as reflected by the assessment of external referees. The curriculum
vitae should reflect a substantial body of work and evidence of continuing productivity and excellence
since promotion to Associate Professor. The successful candidate should have a record of sustained
extramural funding through federal grants and should have a record of teaching excellence. Where
appropriate, it would be desirable if the candidate also served as a graduate student preceptor and/or
chair of thesis committees. The individual will have a record of giving invited lectures at national and
international levels and writing scholarly reviews. The individual is expected to be a member of elected
research societies, study sections, or national organizations. The strongest candidates will hold
leadership positions in these organizations. The curriculum vitae must demonstrate a substantial period
of continuing productivity since the last promotion. Those involved in patient care are expected to be
excellent clinicians.
Information Guide for APT
17
Feinberg recognizes the critical importance of collaboration (“team science”) in research and scholarly
activity and that the contributions of middle authors in multi-authored publications are often seminal and
of the highest quality. When research and/or scholarship is pursued in a collaborative fashion and results
in multi-authored publications, the specific contributions of the candidate must be clear and significant.
The candidate’s role can be described via the Critical References List that must be included in the
promotion dossier and/or their personal statement. In addition, the Chair or others uniquely
positioned to assess the individual contribution of the faculty member should include a description and
evaluation of the quality and impact of the candidate’s contribution.
Areas for special consideration for promotion in the Investigator track:
Research Portfolio:
Having secured and renewed extramural research support as principal investigator
Publications: original investigations of high quality as an independent investigator with
additional consideration for reviews, books, chapters, or clinical observations
Election to honorary academic societies or recipient of other national awards
Recognition in the planning for or participation in national and/or international meetings
Service on national level peer-review groups
Invited lectures outside of Northwestern
Evidence of independent thinking and recognized accomplishment
Patents and licenses
Teaching Portfolio:
Teaching activities at Northwestern University with medical and/or graduate
students/residents/clinical post-doctoral fellows/practitioners – lectures, courses, individual
instruction
Evaluations of teaching – peers/learners, by surveys/letters
New courses developed – syllabi, lecture notes, etc.
New educational programs that complement ongoing courses or curricula
Teaching materials developed or improved – local or published; print or electronic media
Clinical Portfolio (applicable to MDs):
Assessment of clinical practice by clinical leadership and colleagues as quality care that is
patient-centered, effective, efficient, and equitable
Performance on certification or re-certification exams
Continuing medical education activities
Awards for clinical practice
Service to practice management/administrative initiative/critical pathway development
Information Guide for APT
18
2. Clinician-Educator (non-tenure track)
Associate Professor: The successful Clinician-Educator candidate will have a local and regional
reputation as an outstanding clinician and/or scholar in his/her area of expertise. The individual will
have a record of significant scholarship and recognition and/or leadership in two of five domains of
activity (clinical impact and recognition, education, research, health services management, and
community engagement). Productivity in clinical impact and recognition is measured through
development and implementation of clinical protocols and guidelines, clinical programs, and/or quality
initiatives; demonstration of unique clinical expertise; and publication of original papers, case reports,
reviews, editorials, and book chapters. Clinical recognition is also demonstrated by invitations to lecture
at other medical centers in the region, and by participation in courses at the local, regional, and/or
national level. Productivity in education is measured through development and/or leadership of new
and/or innovative educational programs or curricula, evaluation and dissemination of such programs or
curricula nationally, and excellence in teaching. Original papers, reviews, chapters, editorials, or letters in
the area of education also measure productivity. Teaching excellence is essential and is established from
department records, course directors’ records, and the receipt of teaching awards. Productivity in
research is measured by contribution to publications of innovative, original research as a lead author or
member of a research team; participation on extramurally funded research projects as a principal or co-
investigator; and/or participation as a local principal investigator for multicenter studies or collaborations.
Productivity in health services management is measured through the development and/or leadership of
significant clinical programs or clinical support programs which improve the effectiveness, efficiency,
safety, timeliness, patient-centeredness, or equity of health care delivery; development of physician
leadership training programs; and/or scholarly evaluation of health care delivery. Productivity in
community engagement is measured through the development, support, and conduct of meaningful
community engaged research and/or clinical or educational programs for community partners to improve
health and/or health equity. Publication of research findings, development of toolkits and related
resources as well evidence-based practice guidelines and policy documents are measures of productivity.
See Table 3 for examples of scholarship, leadership, and recognition in the different domains. The APT
Committee recognizes the broad range of scholarly activity that can be appropriate for faculty in the
Clinician-Educator or HSC/Academic track.
Professor: The successful Clinician-Educator candidate will have evidence of multiple contributions in
two promotable areas (clinical impact and recognition, education, research, health services
management, and community engagement) with a substantial impact that has resulted in national
recognition of his/her achievements. Productivity in clinical impact and recognition is measured through
development and implementation of clinical protocols and guidelines, clinical programs, and/or quality
initiatives; demonstration of unique clinical expertise; and publication of original papers, case reports,
invited reviews, editorials, and book chapters. Clinical recognition is also demonstrated by invitations to
lecture at other medical centers and national or international meetings, by invitations to serve as a
visiting professor, and by participation in courses at the national and/or international level.
Productivity in education is measured through development and/or leadership of new and/or innovative
educational programs or curricula, evaluation and dissemination of such programs or curricula
nationally, and excellence in teaching. Original papers and invited reviews, chapters, or editorials in the
area of education also measure productivity. Teaching excellence is essential and is established from
department records, course directors’ records, and the receipt of teaching awards. Productivity in
research is measured by contribution to publications of innovative, original research as a lead author or
member of a research team; participation on extramurally-funded research projects as a principal or co-
investigator; and/or participation as a local principal investigator for multicenter studies or
Information Guide for APT
19
collaborations. Productivity in health services management is measured through the development
and/or leadership of significant clinical programs or clinical support programs which improve the
effectiveness, efficiency, safety, timeliness, patient-centeredness, or equity of health care delivery;
development of physician leadership training programs; and/or scholarly evaluation of health care
delivery. Productivity in community engagement is measured through the development, support, and
conduct of meaningful community engaged research and/or clinical or educational programs for
community partners to improve health and/or health equity. Publication of research findings,
development of toolkits and related resources as well evidence-based practice guidelines and policy
documents are measures of productivity. See Table 3 for examples of scholarship, leadership, and
recognition in the different domains. The APT Committee recognizes the broad range of scholarly
activity that can be appropriate for faculty in the Clinician-Educator and HSC/Academic tracks. The
curriculum vitae must demonstrate a substantial period of continuing growth since the last promotion.
The strongest candidates will hold leadership positions in regional and national level professional
societies and editorial boards.
For candidates on the Clinician-Educator track engaged in research and related academic activities,
Feinberg recognizes the critical importance of collaboration (“team science”) in research and scholarly
activity and that the contributions of middle authors in multi-authored publications are often seminal
and of the highest quality. Feinberg also recognizes and considers the importance of some less
traditional forms of academic scholarship that are valued and meaningful products of community
engagement. Examples include written reports of community health needs or assets, community
workshops and presentations, technical reports, evidence-based practice guidelines, and policy
documents. Publications and presentations that are authored jointly with external community leaders
and partners are considered strong forms of community-engaged scholarship. When research and/or
scholarship is pursued in a collaborative fashion and results in multi-authored publications, the specific
contributions of the candidate must be clear and significant. The candidate’s role can be described via
the Critical References List that must be included in the promotion dossier. In addition, the Chair or
others uniquely positioned to assess the individual contribution of the faculty member should include a
description and evaluation of the quality and impact of the candidate’s contribution.
Areas for special consideration of promotion in the Clinician-Educator track:
Clinical Portfolio:
Assessment of clinical practice by clinical leadership and colleagues as high quality care that is
patient-centered, effective, efficient, and equitable
Performance on certification or re-certification exams
Continuing medical education activities
Awards for clinical practice
Service to practice management /administrative initiatives/critical pathway development
Web site/software development
Publications: original investigations, clinical observations, reviews, books, and book chapters
Patient education materials
Invited lectures outside of Northwestern
Popular writings or lay press contributions
Research Portfolio:
Extra- or intramural supported research
Publications: original investigations, reviews, books, and book chapters
Information Guide for APT
20
Invited lectures outside of Northwestern
Popular writings or lay press contributions
Web site/software development
Research activity is not an absolute requirement for promotion in this track for those who have not
chosen research as one of their domains of activity. However, special areas of research, where
appropriate, may include participation in multi-center clinical trials and registry/epidemiologic studies.
The candidate may demonstrate significant participation in such research activities, including in study
design, implementation, statistical analysis, or biomedical informatics support. Chairing or serving on
the steering, planning, or outcomes committees for the study; playing a key role in capturing or
analyzing data; or authorship on manuscripts would demonstrate this.
Education Portfolio:
Teaching activities at Northwestern with medical and graduate students/residents/clinical
postdoctoral fellows/practitioners – lectures, courses, individual instruction
Evaluations of teaching – peers/learners, by surveys/letters
New courses developed – syllabi, lecture notes
New educational programs that complement ongoing courses or curricula
Teaching materials developed or improved – local or published; print or electronic media
Publications: original investigations, reviews, books, and book chapters
Invited lectures outside of Northwestern
Web site/software development
Health Services and Management Portfolio:
Development and/or leadership of significant new and/or innovative clinical programs (e.g.,
medical director of a clinical center) that measurably improve the effectiveness, efficiency,
safety, timeliness, patient-centeredness, or equity of health care delivery
Development and/or leadership of significant new and/or innovative clinical support programs
(e.g., medical director of medical records, IRB, pharmacy and therapeutics committee, quality
improvement programs) that measurably improve the effectiveness, efficiency, safety,
timeliness, patient-centeredness, or equity of health care delivery
Relevant measures include patient, employee, and/or faculty satisfaction; quality of care
indicators; costs of care
Scholarly evaluation of health care delivery with publication of findings regarding the effects of
administrative interventions
Community Engagement Portfolio
Development of training, learning opportunities, toolkits and related resources for community
partners
Community-based education, clinical or research activities
Evidence of contributions to written community organizational policies or practice guidelines
Information Guide for APT
21
Awards for community service
Web site/software development
Publications: original investigations, reviews, books, and book chapters
Community health education materials
Invited lectures outside of Northwestern
Authorship of popular writings or lay press contributions
3. Team Scientist Track (non-tenure track)
Associate Professor: Faculty on this track will have chosen a major domain of activity, in either research
or education. The successful Team Scientist Track candidate will have a record of significant scholarship
and recognition and/or leadership in research and/or education. Productivity for faculty who have
chosen research as their domain is measured by contribution to publications of innovative, original
research as a member of a research team or lead author; documented participation in obtaining and
conducting extramurally-funded research projects of a major program or center as a co-investigator and
possibly as principal investigator; leadership of a major data core on a center grant or multiple project
grant; and/or principal investigator of a stand-alone data coordinating center supporting multicenter
studies. It is an expectation that members of this track who have chosen the research domain will also
contribute to the education and service missions of the medical school. For faculty who choose the
education domain, productivity is measured through leadership and/or development of educational
programs or curricula, especially new and/or innovative programs; evaluation and dissemination of such
programs or curricula; and excellence in teaching. Original papers, reviews, chapters, editorials, or
letters in the area of education also measure productivity. Teaching excellence is essential and is
established from department records, course directors’ records, and the receipt of teaching awards. The
APT Committee recognizes the broad range of scholarly activity and nature of contributions to research
teams and/or education that can be appropriate for faculty in the Team Scientist track depending upon
their chosen domain.
Professor: The successful Team Scientist track candidate will have evidence of multiple contributions in
the areas of research and/or education with a substantial impact in one of these areas that has resulted
in national recognition of his/her achievements. The curriculum vita must demonstrate a substantial
period of continuing growth since the last promotion. The strongest candidates will hold leadership
positions in regional and national level professional societies, participate on editorial boards and/or be
members of study sections and/or data monitoring boards. Productivity for faculty who have chosen
research as their domain is measured by contribution to publications of innovative, original research as
a member of a research team or lead author; documented participation in obtaining and conducting
extramurally-funded research projects of a major program or center as a co-investigator and possibly as
principal investigator; leadership of a major data core on a center grant or multiple project grant; and/or
principal investigator of a stand-alone data coordinating center supporting multicenter studies. It is an
expectation that members of this track who have chosen the research domain will also contribute to the
education and service missions of the medical school. For faculty who choose the education domain,
productivity is measured through leadership and/or development and/or leadership of educational
programs or curricula, especially new and/or innovative programs; evaluation and dissemination of such
programs or curricula; and excellence in teaching. Original papers, reviews, chapters, editorials, or
letters in the area of education also measure productivity. Teaching excellence is essential and is
established from department records, course directors’ records, and the receipt of teaching awards.
The APT Committee recognizes the broad range of scholarly activity and nature of contributions to
research teams and/or education that can be appropriate for faculty in the Team Scientist track
depending upon their chosen domain.
Information Guide for APT
22
Areas for special consideration of promotion in the research domain on the Team Scientist track:
For candidates on the Team Scientist track engaged in research and related academic activities, Feinberg
recognizes the critical importance of collaboration in research and scholarly activity and that the
contributions of middle authors in multi-authored publications are often seminal and of the highest
quality. It is an expectation that faculty on this track who choose the research domain will generally be
members of a research team and that their contributions to publications will often be as middle authors.
When research and/or scholarship is pursued in a collaborative fashion and results in multi-authored
publications, the specific contributions of the candidate should be made clear. The school also
recognizes the critical contributions of collaborators in the acquisition of grant funding to collaborative
research projects. The candidate’s role in manuscripts and grants can be described via the personal
statement, letters from program leaders documenting the unique collaborative contribution of the
candidate to programmatic research, and the Critical References List that must be included in the
promotion dossier. In addition, the Chair, Program Leader, or others uniquely positioned to assess the
individual contribution of the faculty member should include a description and evaluation of the quality
and impact of the candidate’s contributions to the research team(s).
It is expected that most members of this track who choose research as their domain of activity will likely
serve as co-investigators on a number of different studies, serving as a methodologist or other critical
contributor, and, possibly, as principal investigator on occasion. The candidate may demonstrate
significant participation in such research activities, including study design, implementation, statistical
analysis, or biomedical informatics support; chairing or serving on the steering, planning, or outcomes
committees for the study; playing a key role in capturing or analyzing data; or authorship on
manuscripts would demonstrate such participation.
Research Portfolio:
Extramural supported research, including specific essential role as a co-investigator and, in some
cases, as principal investigator
Publications: original investigations as a co-author or first or senior author, with recognition,
where appropriate, of contributions as a senior methodologist
Primary or co-author on reviews, books, and book chapters
Invited lectures outside of Northwestern
Web site/software development
Areas for special consideration of promotion in the education domain on the Team Scientist track:
It is expected that educational activities will be the primary focus for members of this track who choose
education as their domain of activity. Collaborative research similar to that described for those who
choose the research domain is not a requirement for those who choose the education domain, but
some faculty who choose education as their domain of activity may also be involved in such research. It
is anticipated that this research activity will typically be as a co-investigator, but it may, on occasion,
include research activities as a principal investigator. While accomplishments in the domain of
education will be most important for promotion for faculty who choose education as their domain of
activity, research accomplishments should also be included in the promotion portfolio to help document
the full range of a faculty member’s scholarly accomplishments.
Information Guide for APT
23
Education Portfolio:
Teaching activities at Northwestern with medical and graduate students and other trainees as
appropriate; includes lectures, courses
Evaluations of teaching – peers/learners, by surveys/letters
New courses developed – syllabi, lecture notes
New educational programs that complement ongoing courses or curricula
Teaching materials developed or improved – local or published; print or electronic media
4. Research faculty (non-tenure track)
Research Associate Professor: Successful candidates will have a history of outstanding collaborative
and/or independent scientific investigation. A series of peer-reviewed articles in respected journals (as
judged in part by citation index) should present a coherent body of research accomplishments. The
candidate may have independent research grant support (not required), usually from the National
Institutes of Health, other federal agencies, other foundation funds, or from participation in program
project and other group grants. Alternatively, the candidate may serve as a co-investigator on grants.
Membership in research societies, presentations at national meetings, and invited lectures, although not
required, indicate the importance of the individual’s research and his/her reputation. Sometimes
research faculty will contribute to bench teaching of junior members of a laboratory. For research
faculty engaged in research support activities, candidates should be able to demonstrate the extent to
which their activities contribute to research excellence within the Feinberg School of Medicine, and for
work in research support facilities, the impact and excellence of the research support facility.
Research Professor: Successful candidates will be scholars in their area of expertise (as judged in part by
citation index). The candidate may have independent research grant support, usually from the National
Institutes of Health or other foundation funds, in addition to support from participation in program
project and other group grants. Alternatively, the candidate may serve as a co-investigator on grants.
The curriculum vita should reflect evidence of continuing productivity and excellence since appointment
or promotion to Associate Professor. Membership in research societies, presentations at national
meetings, and invited lectures, although not required, indicate the importance of the individual’s
research and his/her reputation. Sometimes research faculty will contribute to bench teaching of junior
members of a laboratory. For research faculty engaged in research support activities, contributions to
excellence in research may be evidenced by the following: establishing new research support activities
of demonstrated excellence that enhance the research capabilities and excellence of Northwestern;
receiving letters from investigators at Northwestern or other institutions, from administrative officials at
Northwestern, or from authorities outside Northwestern attesting to the contributions made by the
candidate towards progress in the research programs of individual investigators; or contributing to
research excellence at Northwestern in general through research support activities.
The contribution of research faculty is typically through participation as part of a research team within a
single laboratory. Feinberg recognizes the critical importance of collaboration (“team science”) in
research and scholarly activity and that the contributions of middle authors in multi-authored
publications are often seminal and of the highest quality. When research and/or scholarship is pursued in
a collaborative fashion and results in multi-authored publications, the specific contributions of the
candidate must be clear and significant. The candidate’s role can be described via the Critical References
List that must be included in the promotion dossier. In addition, the Chair or others uniquely positioned to
assess the individual contribution of the faculty member should include a description and evaluation of
Information Guide for APT
24
the quality and impact of the candidate’s contribution.
Areas for special consideration of promotion in the Research track:
Research/Publications Portfolio:
Evidence of extra- or intramural supported research, either as a principal investigator or co-
investigator
Publications: original investigations, clinical observations, reviews, books, and book chapters
Additional accomplishments and activities that are not required but warrant consideration:
o Web site/software development
o Invited lectures outside of Northwestern
o Awards
o Service on national level peer-review groups
o Patents and licenses
o Popular writings or lay press contributions
5. Health System Clinician (non-tenure tracks)
Clinical Associate Professor: The successful Health System Clinician candidate will have a local and
regional reputation as an outstanding clinician and/or scholar in his/her area of expertise. The individual
will have a record of significant scholarship and recognition and/or leadership as an expert clinician, plus
one area of concentration. Productivity in clinical impact and recognition is measured through
development and implementation of clinical protocols and guidelines, clinical programs, and/or quality
initiatives; demonstration of unique clinical expertise; and publication of original papers, case reports,
reviews, editorials, and book chapters. Clinical recognition is also demonstrated by invitations to lecture
at other medical centers in the region, and by participation in courses at the local, regional, and/or
national level. Areas of Concentration can include productivity in education, research, productivity in
health services management or productivity in community engagement.
Clinical Professor: The successful Health System Clinician candidate will have evidence of significant
contributions as an outstanding clinician and/or scholar in his/her area of expertise in addition to a
second area of concentration (research, health services management, or community engagement) with
a substantial impact that has resulted in regional and national recognition of his/her achievements.
Productivity in clinical impact and recognition is measured through development and implementation of
clinical protocols and guidelines, clinical programs, and/or quality initiatives; demonstration of unique
clinical expertise; and publication of original papers, case reports, invited reviews, editorials, and book
chapters. Clinical recognition is also demonstrated by invitations to lecture at other medical centers and
national or international meetings, by invitations to serve as a visiting professor, and by participation in
courses at the national and/or international level. Productivity in education is measured through
development and/or leadership of new and/or innovative educational programs or curricula, evaluation
and dissemination of such programs or curricula nationally, and excellence in teaching. Original papers
and invited reviews, chapters, or editorials in the area of education also measure productivity.
Productivity in research is measured by contribution to publications of innovative, original research as a
lead author or member of a research team; participation on extramurally funded research projects as a
principal or co- investigator; and/or participation as a local principal investigator for multicenter studies
Information Guide for APT
25
or collaborations. Productivity in health services management is measured through the development
and/or leadership of significant clinical programs or clinical support programs which improve the
effectiveness, efficiency, safety, timeliness, patient-centeredness, or equity of health care delivery;
development of physician leadership training programs; and/or scholarly evaluation of health care
delivery. Productivity in community engagement is measured through the development, support, and
conduct of meaningful community engaged research and/or clinical or educational programs for
community partners to improve health and/or health equity. Publication of research findings,
development of toolkits and related resources as well evidence-based practice guidelines and policy
documents are measures of productivity. See Table 3 for examples of scholarship, leadership, and
recognition in the different domains. The APT Committee recognizes the broad range of scholarly
activity that can be appropriate for faculty in the Health System Clinician track. The curriculum vitae
must demonstrate a substantial period of continuing growth since the last promotion. The strongest
candidates will hold leadership positions in regional and national level professional societies and
editorial boards.
Areas for special consideration of promotion in the Health System Clinician track:
Clinical Portfolio:
Assessment of clinical practice by clinical leadership and colleagues as high quality care that is
patient-centered, effective, efficient, and equitable
Performance on certification or re-certification exams
Continuing medical education activities
Awards for clinical practice
Service to practice management /administrative initiatives/critical pathway development
Web site/software development
Publications: original investigations, clinical observations, reviews, books, and book chapters
Patient education materials
Invited lectures outside of Northwestern
Popular writings or lay press contributions
Areas of Concentration
Education Portfolio:
Teaching activities at Northwestern with medical and graduate students/residents/clinical
postdoctoral fellows/practitioners – lectures, courses, individual instruction. All activities
must have student/trainee evaluations.
Evaluations of teaching – peers/learners, by surveys/letters
New courses developed – syllabi, lecture notes
New educational programs that complement ongoing courses or curricula
Teaching materials developed or improved – local or published; print or electronic media
Publications: original investigations, reviews, books, and book chapters
Invited education lectures outside of Northwestern
Web site/software development
Information Guide for APT
26
Research:
Extra- or intramural supported research (dry-lab or clinical trials)
Publications: original investigations, reviews, books, and book chapters
Invited lectures outside of Northwestern
Popular writings or lay press contributions
Web site/software development
Health Services and Management:
Development and/or leadership of significant new and/or innovative clinical programs (e.g.,
medical director of a clinical center) that measurably improve the effectiveness, efficiency,
safety, timeliness, patient-centeredness, or equity of health care delivery
Development and/or leadership of significant new and/or innovative clinical support programs
(e.g., medical director of medical records, IRB, pharmacy and therapeutics committee, quality
improvement programs) that measurably improve the effectiveness, efficiency, safety,
timeliness, patient-centeredness, or equity of health care delivery
Relevant measures include patient, employee, and/or faculty satisfaction; quality of care
indicators; costs of care
Scholarly evaluation of health care delivery with publication of findings regarding the effects of
administrative interventions
Community Engagement
Development of training, learning opportunities, toolkits and related resources for community
partners
Community-based education, clinical or research activities
Evidence of contributions to written community organizational policies or practice guidelines
Awards for community service
Web site/software development
Publications: original investigations, reviews, books, and book chapters
Community health education materials
Invited lectures outside of Northwestern
Authorship of popular writings or lay press contributions
F. Common Reasons for Failing to Achieve Promotion
Department Chairs along with their Departmental APT Committees, where they exist, are encouraged to
evaluate their faculty critically and to recommend to the Dean’s office and APT Committee only those
candidates who are expected to meet the appointment or promotion criteria of the medical school.
After a period of evaluation, not all faculty meet criteria for promotion, and recommendation by their
Department does not assure success either at the level of the APT Committee, Dean, or Provost. Like
other research-intensive peer institutions, the reasons for failure vary and are as individualized as the
faculty members themselves, but tend to fall into several broad categories:
Premature request for promotion - accelerated promotion is reserved for outstanding, highly
Information Guide for APT
27
productive faculty members who have made major academic contributions. Because of the
impact of a negative decision, the Dean’s office recommends that Departments carefully
consider a candidate’s qualifications before proposing any faculty member for accelerated
promotion.
Inappropriate track or choice of domains - faculty are in a track inconsistent with their actual
activities and so have inadequate credentials for promotion; similarly, faculty on the Clinician-
Educator or Team Scientist tracks may choose domains for which they have inadequate
credentials for promotions.
Poor productivity - based on the APT Committee's own review and/or comments from referees,
the candidate’s academic productivity is inadequate to support promotion. Reasons for
deficiencies vary. Common problems might include insufficient standing or level of contribution
to the field, lack of independence (especially in the tenure track), publications in low-cited
journals, and failure to maintain a consistent publication record. In the Clinician-Educator track,
poor productivity may reflect inadequate documentation of clinical reputation or teaching
excellence, insufficient contributions to scholarship, lack of educational program development
and/or leadership, and lack of significant administrative contributions.
Inadequate grant support - for tenure and research track faculty, a record of past and recurrent
grant support consistent with the specific rank is not evident.
G. Recommendation for New Appointment
Before recruiting full-time faculty members on the Clinician-Educator, Team Scientist, or Investigator
career tracks, departments must first obtain authorization to conduct a search from the Dean and
Provost. Departments propose full-time positions for Clinician-Educators, Team Scientists, and
Investigators when creating their annual faculty hiring plan in the spring; after the hiring plan is
approved, departments follow the pre-search process to request University-approved search numbers
for individual positions. The request for a search number is submitted electronically to the Faculty
Affairs Office for initial review and approval by FSM before it is reviewed by the Provost’s office, which
assigns the official search number. Candidates for new appointment to the faculty are identified
typically through national searches by search committees approved by the Dean and Provost, except in
rare circumstances in which a waiver of search is granted because a candidate presents a unique target
of opportunity. In general, internal candidates must be evaluated against potential external candidates.
After identification of a finalist candidate who has expressed his or her intent to join the faculty, the
department prepares a business plan, draft offer letter, and Chair’s recommendation letter, which are
electronically submitted to the FSM Dean’s office along with candidate materials (refer to Table 2) for
approval. The department should send the formal offer letter to the candidate only after the offer has
been approved by the Dean and, depending on rank and tenure status, the Provost.
When recommending a candidate for a new faculty appointment, the Chair’s letter (see the template
Chair Recommendation #1) should discuss the following:
Search Process: nature of the search process, including the strategies used to identify
Information Guide for APT
28
candidates, the number of potential candidates, and the approach used to identify the finalist.
Description of the finalist: a description of the candidate’s background and accomplishments,
the role that they will play in the department, and their potential for collaborations and
interactions with others at Northwestern.
Job expectations: a brief description of the expectations of the Department.
Mentoring committee (if applicable): identify the members of the mentoring committee and
the plan for mentoring the new faculty member.
A responsible supervisor: provide the name of individual or program that will be responsible for
career development of the proposed individual.
After a candidate accepts an offer, the department assembles any needed documents (e.g., human
resources and payroll forms) to complete the appointment process. Candidates who were not reviewed
by the Provost at the time of the draft offer letter are reviewed during this appointment phase.
Appointment to the faculty is contingent upon approval of the Provost.
Instructors are initially appointed for a one-year term, and Assistant Professors are initially appointed for
a three-year term. Associate Professors and Professors are initially appointed for three-year terms, unless
the initial appointment is tenured.
H. Reappointment/Promotion Recommendation and Criteria for Promotion
The Department with the approval of the Department Chair, usually in consultation with Center
Directors where appropriate, submits requests for reappointment as a Chair Recommendation (see
examples #2-5). Faculty in the Investigator, Team Scientist, or Clinician-Educator tracks at the rank of
Assistant Professor are appointed for 3-year terms and reappointed for 1-year renewable terms. When
promoted to Associate Professor or Professor, reappointments typically resume at 3-year intervals (with
the exception of tenured faculty). Faculty appointed on the Health System Clinician track are appointed
for 1- year terms, regardless of rank. Faculty on all other tracks are initially appointed for 1-3 years with
reappointment intervals recommended by the Department Chair. Mandatory review for the award of
tenure will follow the process as required by the Feinberg School of Medicine and Northwestern
University.
The intent is for the Chair Recommendation to be a living document that is reviewed and updated
annually by the Chair to reflect the ongoing activities and accomplishments of the faculty member. This
same document can then be used as the basis for the Chair recommendation when the faculty member
is proposed for promotion (see below).
All non-tenured faculty at the level of Assistant Professor or higher whom the Department does not plan
to reappoint must be provided with a letter indicating the Department’s intent to not renew their
appointment. Letters to the faculty member from the Chair must describe the timing of the remaining
appointment; faculty on an annual reappointment cycle require 4 months written notice and faculty on
3-year reappointment cycles require 1 year notice in writing.
At the time of promotion, the Department Chair as part of the evaluation process will provide a Chair
Recommendation (see example Chair Recommendations #2-5). Elements to be addressed in the Chair’s
recommendation are provided below.
Information Guide for APT
29
1. Promotion Recommendations and Criteria for the Investigator track:
In general, the Chair’s Recommendation should address each of the areas below as a separate
paragraph. The Departmental APT Committee’s report should also highlight important points related to
these areas and address other issues important to the evaluation that may fall outside these areas.
Academic career:
Consistency and importance of research theme
Quality and originality of scientific work
Unique contributions of the candidate to collaborative (team science) research projects and
scholarly activities
Unique contributions of research to improving community health, policy, or practice
Productivity
Independence
Impact and stature in the field
Evidence of contribution to education (e.g., teaching awards, evaluations, etc.)
Other: The recommendation and/or report is, of course, expected to include any additional factors that
should be brought to the attention of the APT Committee and the evaluation process, e.g., university
citizenship, community service, etc.
2. Promotion Recommendations and Criteria for Clinician-Educator Track
In general, the Chair’s Recommendation should address each of the areas below as a separate
paragraph. The Departmental APT Committee’s report should also highlight important points related to
these areas and address other issues important to the evaluation that may fall outside these areas.
Academic career:
Accomplishments and scholarship in the two chosen domains of activity (Clinical, Education,
Research, Health Services and Management, and Community Engagement), each in a separate
paragraph
Contributions to education (if not addressed above)
Clinical accomplishments (where appropriate)
Unique contributions of the candidate to collaborative (team science) research projects and
scholarly activities
Contributions to community policy, practice, health outcomes, health equity, or social justice
(where appropriate)
Local and regional recognition (national in the case of promotion to Professor):
Other: The report and/or recommendation is expected to include any additional factors that should be
brought to the attention of the APT Committee including university citizenship, community service, and
other meritorious activities.
Information Guide for APT
30
3. Promotion Recommendations and Criteria for Team Scientist Track
In general, the Chair’s Recommendation should address each of the areas below as a separate
paragraph. The Departmental APT Committee’s report should also highlight important points related to
these areas and address other issues important to the evaluation that may fall outside these areas.
Academic career:
Accomplishments and scholarship in the chosen domain of activity (Research or Education),
each in a separate paragraph
Contributions to education (if not addressed above)
Unique contributions of the candidate to collaborative (team science) research projects and
scholarly activities
Local and regional recognition (national in the case of promotion to Professor):
Other: The report and/or recommendation is expected to include any additional factors that should be
brought to the attention of the APT Committee including university citizenship, community service, and
other meritorious activities.
4. Promotion Recommendations and Criteria for the Research Track
In general, the Chair’s Recommendation should address each of the areas below as a separate
paragraph. The Departmental APT Committee’s report should also highlight important points related to
these areas and address other issues important to the evaluation that may fall outside these areas.
Academic career:
Consistency and importance of research theme
Quality of scientific work
Unique contributions of the candidate to collaborative (team science) research projects and
scholarly activities
Productivity
Role in the research team and/or independence
Impact and stature in the field
Other: The report and/or recommendation is expected to include any additional factors that should be
brought to the attention of the APT Committee in the evaluation process, including university
citizenship, community service, and other meritorious activities.
5. Promotion Recommendations and Criteria for Health System Clinician Track
In general, the Chair’s Recommendation should address each of the areas below as a separate
paragraph. The Departmental APT Committee’s report should also highlight important points related to
these areas and address other issues important to the evaluation that may fall outside these areas.
Information Guide for APT
31
Academic career:
Clinical accomplishments (where appropriate)
Accomplishments and scholarship in clinical practice
Contributions to one area of concentration (Research, Health Services and Management, Community
Engagement)
Unique contributions of the candidate to collaborative (team science) research projects and
scholarly activities
Contributions to community policy, practice, health outcomes, health equity, or social justice
(where appropriate)
Local, regional and national recognition
Other: The report and/or recommendation is expected to include any additional factors that should be
brought to the attention of the Chair and the Co-Chair of the APT Committee including university
citizenship, community service, and other meritorious activities.
Information Guide for APT
32
Appendices
Document Templates and Forms
The most current versions of forms and document templates required for faculty appointment,
promotion, and tenure processes are available on the website of the Faculty Affairs Office (FAO). The list
below highlights documents frequently used by faculty.
Candidate Documents for Promotion
Feinberg faculty who maintain their profiles and career accomplishments in the Feinberg Faculty Portal
can generate most elements of their promotion packet electronically. Alternatively, faculty may prepare
their packets manually using document templates available on the FAO website. For more information
on both options and for tips on preparing the documents listed below, please visit the Prepare Your
Packet page on the FAO website.
• Personal Statement
• Feinberg Standard CV
• CV Supplements
o Quality Improvement Initiatives
o Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Initiatives
o Development and Leadership of Clinical Initiatives
o Public and Population Health Initiatives
o Global Health Initiatives
• Record of Teaching
• Critical References List
• Referee List
Chair’s Recommendation Templates
The following documents are used by the department chair to nominate faculty for initial appointment,
promotion, tenure, and endowed professorships. The numbers correspond to the example Chair
Recommendations referenced throughout the guide.
1. Chair’s Recommendation for Regular Faculty Appointment
2. Chair’s Recommendation for Promotion/Tenure on Investigator Track
3. Chair’s Recommendation for Promotion on Clinician-Educator Track
4. Chair’s Recommendation for Promotion on Team Scientist Track
5. Chair’s Recommendation for Promotion on Research Track
6. Chair’s Recommendation for Promotion on Health System Clinician Track
7. Chair’s Nomination for Endowed Professorship
Request Forms
The following forms are co-signed by the faculty candidate and the Department Chair.
• Faculty Request to Obtain Outside Appointment
• Request for Academic/Personal Leave of Absence (non-medical)
• Request to Extend Tenure Probationary Period
• Emeritus Request Form
Table 1: Faculty Dossiers for Promotion to Indicated Ranks
Career
Track
Rank of Proposed
Promotion
Tenure
Status
1
Candidate Submits
Dept. Submits
Soliciting Reference Letters
CV
Personal
State-
ment
Record
of
Teaching
Critical
References
CV Supple-
ments
2
Letter from
Program
Leader
Referee
List
3
# Referees to
Suggest
Chair’s
Letter
Dept. APT
Report
Who Contacts
Referees?
# of
Letters
Sought
Min Max
Investigator
Professor
T
Optional
4
5
FSM FAO
6*
Award of tenure only
T
Optional
4
5
FSM FAO
6*
Associate Professor
T
Optional
4
5
FSM FAO
6*
Assoc Prof w/o tenure
TE
Optional
6
8
Dept Chair’s Office
6
Assistant Professor
TE
Optional
4
6
Dept Chair’s Office
4
Clinician-
Educator
Professor
NTE
Optional
6
8
Dept Chair’s Office
6
Associate Professor
NTE
Optional
6
8
Dept Chair’s Office
6
Assistant Professor
NTE
Optional
4
6
Dept Chair’s Office
4
Team
Scientist
Professor
NTE
Optional
Required for
research
domain only
6
8
Dept Chair’s Office
6
Associate Professor
NTE
Optional
6
8
Dept Chair’s Office
6
Assistant Professor
NTE
Optional
4
6
Dept Chair’s Office
4
Research
Research Professor
NTE
Optional
4
6
Dept Chair’s Office
4
Research Assoc Prof
NTE
Optional
4
6
Dept Chair’s Office
4
Clinician-
Educator
(contributed
services)
Clinical Professor
NTE
Optional
6
8
Dept Chair’s Office
6
Clinical Associate Prof
NTE
Optional
6
8
Dept Chair’s Office
6
Clinical Assistant Prof
NTE
Optional
4
6
Dept Chair’s Office
4
Health
System
Clinician
Clinical Professor
NTE
Optional
4
Optional
For Education as
an area of
concentration
6
8
Dept Chair’s Office
6
Clinical Associate Prof
NTE
Optional
4
Optional
6
8
Dept Chair’s Office
6
1
Tenure Status: T = Tenured TE = Tenure-eligible NTE = Non-tenure-eligible
2
CV Supplements: These optional CV supplements may be submitted by faculty on any career track: (1) Quality Improvement Initiatives, (2) Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion
Initiatives, (3) Development and Leadership of Clinical Initiatives, (4) Public and Population Health Initiatives, and (5) Global Health Initiatives.
3
Referee List: For promotions to the levels of Associate Professor and Professor, referees must be external to Northwestern and should not have a training connection to the
candidate. For promotion to the level of Assistant Professor, two letters may come from referees within the candidate’s primary department and the others should come from
referees outside the primary department, meaning referees in other Northwestern departments or referees based outside of Northwestern. See the FAO website for more
information.
4
Critical References: Applicable to those with Research as an area of concentration.
*For Investigators who already have tenure and those being proposed for the award of tenure, the Faculty Affairs Office solicits reference letters from referees suggested by the
nominee and from additional referees suggested by an ad hoc committee. The ad hoc committee cannot suggest referee names that were provided by the nominee.
Table 2: Faculty Dossiers for New Appointments
*T = Tenured TE = Tenure-eligible NTE = Non-tenure-eligible
**Initial appointment is for a term of 3 years, with reappointment in one-year terms until promotion is achieved.
***Initial appointment is for a term of 3 years, and reappointment terms are typically also 3 years.
**** Referee Guidance:
• Candidates suggest names, but should not contact their referees to solicit their own letters.
•
Referees must hold a rank that is equivalent to or higher than the rank of the proposed appointment.
•
For appointments at the levels of Associate Professor or Professor, referees must be external to Northwestern and those without a training connection to the candidate are preferred.
Referees should represent multiple institutions, as this provides evidence of the breadth of a candidate’s reputation.
•
For appointments at the Assistant Professor level, two letters may come from referees in the candidate’s primary department and the others should come from referees outside the
candidate’s primary department. (For example, a candidate who is just finishing training could obtain all letters from the home institution where they are training, as long as no more than
two letters come from their home department.)
Career Track
Academic Title
Tenure
Status*
Appt.
Term in
Years
Candidate Submits
Soliciting Reference Letters
CV
Research
Statement
Referee
List
# Referees to Suggest****
Who Contacts?
# Letters
Sought
Min
Max
Investigator
Professor
Tenured
6
8
FSM Faculty Affairs Office
6
Associate Professor
Tenured
6
8
FSM Faculty Affairs Office
6
Associate Professor w/o tenure
TE
3
6
8
Dept. Chair’s Office
6
Assistant Professor
TE
3**
4
6
Dept. Chair’s Office
4
Clinician-Educator
(full-time)
Professor
NTE
3***
6
8
Dept. Chair’s Office
6
Associate Professor
NTE
3***
6
8
Dept. Chair’s Office
6
Assistant Professor
NTE
3**
4
6
Dept. Chair’s Office
4
Instructor
NTE
1
Clinician-Educator
(part-time)
Professor
NTE
3***
6
8
Dept. Chair’s Office
6
Associate Professor
NTE
3***
6
8
Dept. Chair’s Office
6
Assistant Professor
NTE
3**
4
6
Dept. Chair’s Office
4
Instructor
NTE
1
Team Scientist
(full-time)
Professor
NTE
3***
6
8
Dept. Chair’s Office
6
Associate Professor
NTE
3***
6
8
Dept. Chair’s Office
6
Assistant Professor
NTE
3**
4
6
Dept. Chair’s Office
4
Team Scientist
(part-time)
Professor
NTE
3***
6
8
Dept. Chair’s Office
6
Associate Professor
NTE
3***
6
8
Dept. Chair’s Office
6
Assistant Professor
NTE
3**
4
6
Dept. Chair’s Office
4
Research
Research Professor
NTE
1
4
6
Dept. Chair’s Office
4
Research Associate Professor
NTE
1
4
6
Dept. Chair’s Office
4
Research Assistant Professor
NTE
1
4
6
Dept. Chair’s Office
4
Health System
Clinician
Clinical Professor
NTE
1
3
6
Dept. Chair’s Office
3
Clinical Associate Professor
NTE
1
3
6
Dept. Chair’s Office
3
Clinical Assistant Professor
NTE
1
3
6
Dept. Chair’s Office
3
Other
Adjunct Faculty (any rank)
NTE
1
Table 3: Domains of Activity on the Clinician-Educator and Health System Clinician Tracks and Examples of Accomplishments
Domain
Dimensions of Achievement and Examples of Contributions
Scholarship
Recognition and Leadership
Professional Service*
Clinical Impact
and Recognition
• Development and implementation of clinical
protocols and guidelines
• Development and implementation of
innovative clinical programs or quality
initiatives
• Unique expertise in clinical or consultative
specialty
• Publication of case reports, reviews, editorials
and book chapters
• Leadership activity in professional organizations
• Editorial activity for medical journals
• Recognition by community or peers as clinical leader
• Consultative positions in governmental or
nongovernmental organizations
• Consistent outstanding evaluations as a clinician from
residents and medical students
• Participation in the development of clinical guidelines,
statements, and other expert opinion documents that
form the basis for the national standard of patient
care
• Provision of high-quality, evidence-based
patient care
• Service contributions to the academic medical
center, medical school, or university
• Community outreach
• Mentorship of junior faculty, fellows, and
residents.
Teaching and
Education
• Novel contributions to education research and
development
• Development of new approaches to teaching
(e.g., audiovisual, web-based, texts, manuals,
curriculum development, and student
assessment and educational/programmatic
evaluation)
• Collaborations with Searle Center for Teaching
Excellence
• Receipt of teaching awards
• Recurring exceptional teaching effectiveness on
evaluations
• Leadership activities in residency programs or medical
student clerkships.
• Leadership activities in medical school or university
education.
• Leadership in national organizations whose primary
focus is education.
• Editorial activity for education journals.
• Visiting professorships, national presentations, and
invited lectures.
• Teaching medical students in courses such as
Problem Based Learning and Medical Decision
Making is expected
(http://www.feinberg.northwestern.edu/sites/
fame/teaching-opportunities/index.html)
• Mentorship of junior faculty, fellows, and
residents.
• Review activities for education journals.
• Development of systems that support teaching
• Participation in student/housestaff recruitment
and selection
Original Research
• Contribute to publications of innovative,
original research as a PI or member of a
research team
• Consistent receipt of extramural funding (e.g.,
governmental and nongovernmental)
• Principal investigator of multicenter studies or
collaborations
•
Editorial activities for journals
• Leader of scientific review committees
• Leadership activity in professional organizations
• Participation in scientific review for granting agencies
• Awards
•
Review activities for journals.
• Teaching research methods through courses
and seminars.
• Mentorship of junior faculty, fellows, and
residents.
Health Services
and Management
• Scholarly evaluation of health care delivery
with publication of findings regarding the
effects of administrative interventions
• Development of physician leadership training
programs (e.g., administrative fellowship with
MBA at Kellogg)
• Development of innovative administrative
programs
• Administrative leadership activity in the medical
center, medical school, or university
• Department or division leadership activity (e.g., chair,
vice chair, director)
• Leadership in faculty development.
• Leadership activity in professional organizations
• Demonstration of effective administration of
health care delivery
• Participation in administration of medical school
departments and centers
• Committee service (departmental, medical
school, or university).
• Mentorship of junior faculty, fellows, and
residents.
Domain
Dimensions of Achievement and Examples of Contributions
Scholarship
Recognition and Leadership
Professional Service*
Community
Engagement
• Contribute to community-engaged research
activities and publication of the findings
• Development of community-based clinical
and/or educational programs
• Development of training, learning
opportunities, toolkits and related resources
for community partners
• Additional forms of scholarship, such as
collaborative authorship contributions to
community health needs or asset reports,
evidence-based practice guidelines, and policy
documents
• Curricular design or leadership over
educational or training programs that are
developed, implemented, and evaluated in
collaboration with community partners to
respond to community-identified needs,
concerns, or interests (e.g. service learning
programs)
• Receipt of awards for community-based activities and
service
• Leadership or co-leadership of community-based
initiatives
• Research leadership/innovation in strong partnership
with community organizations, including serving as co-
PI, PI, or co-investigator on externally funded
community-based research projects with community
organization investigators
• Education about, and/or promotion of, clinical
research in a community setting
• Service on governance or advisory committees
in a community organization
• Mentoring community organization staff in
research planning and/or funding proposals
• Teaching activities conducted in community
settings for Northwestern medical and/or
graduate students/residents/clinical post-
doctoral fellows/practitioners – lectures,
courses, individual instruction
• Teaching activities conducted in community
settings for community residents, such as
elementary or high school students, employees
of community or faith organizations, or
community residents served by sponsoring
service organizations – workshops, lectures,
courses, individual instruction
*Professional Service represents activities expected of faculty members for promotion by virtue of their faculty appointment and should be combined with activities that
demonstrate Scholarship or Recognition and Leadership for successful promotion. For the Health System Clinicians only expected professional services are those that apply to the
clinical service.
Table 4: Domains of Activity on the Team Scientist Career Track and Examples of Accomplishments
Domain
Dimensions of Achievement and Examples of Contributions
Scholarship
+
Recognition and Leadership
Professional Service*
Research
• Contribute to publications of innovative,
original research as a member of a
research team or lead or senior author
• Consistent receipt of extramural (e.g.,
governmental and nongovernmental)
funding in programmatic role as a co-
investigator where a key role was played
in the project
• Principal or co-investigator of multicenter
studies or collaborations
• Principal or co-investigator on research
grants
• Leadership of a major data core on a
center grant or multiple project grant
• Editorial activities for journals
• Member of scientific review committees
• Leadership activity in professional
organizations
• Participation in scientific review for granting
agencies
• Member of data monitoring boards
• Awards
• Visiting professorships, national presentations,
and invited lectures
• Review activities for journals.
• Mentorship of junior faculty, fellows, and
graduate students.
Education
• Novel contributions to education research
and development
• Development of new approaches to
teaching (e.g., audiovisual, web-based,
texts, manuals, curriculum development,
and student assessment and
educational/programmatic evaluation)
• Evidence for dissemination of teaching
scholarship
• Collaborations with Searle Center for
Teaching Excellence
•
Receipt of teaching awards
• Recurring exceptional teaching effectiveness on
evaluations
• Leadership activities in medical school or
university education.
• Leadership in national organizations whose
primary focus is education.
• Editorial activity for education journals.
• Visiting professorships, national presentations,
and invited lectures.
• Educational service contributions to
medical school or university.
• Mentorship of junior faculty, fellows, and
graduate students.
• Review activities for education journals.
• Development of systems that support
teaching
• Participation in student/resident
recruitment and selection
+
Examples of scholarship are provided, but there is not an expectation that an individual faculty member will have accomplished all of these; rather, some of
these examples or other scholarly accomplishments will be evident at the time of promotion. Faculty choosing research as their domain are expected to have
accomplishments in the Scholarship and Recognition and Leadership dimensions for research and contributions in the Professional Service dimension for
education. Faculty choosing education as their domain are expected to have accomplishments in the Scholarship and Recognition and Leadership dimensions
for education. These faculty may also make contributions to collaborative research similar to that described for those who choose the research domain, but
this is not a requirement for those who choose the education domain.
*Professional Service represents activities expected of faculty members by virtue of their faculty appointment and not activities that demonstrate Scholarship
or Recognition and Leadership needed for promotion. For the Health System Clinicians only expected professional services are those that apply to the clinical
service.
Figures
Note: Departments’ internal processes for evaluating and recommending candidates for promotion and tenure vary, and departments with divisions may have additional division-
level steps for nominating candidates. Faculty should check with their department or division leadership to learn the internal departmental process.
Note: Departments’ internal processes for evaluating and recommending candidates for promotion and tenure vary, and departments with divisions may have additional division-
level steps for nominating candidates. Faculty should check with their department or division leadership to learn the internal departmental process.
Note: Departments’ internal processes for evaluating and recommending candidates for promotion and tenure vary, and departments with divisions may have additional division-
level steps for nominating candidates. Faculty should check with their department or division leadership to learn the internal departmental process.
