CON Guidelines for Doctorally Prepared Faculty Role Differentiation
|UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA MEDICAL CENTER
COLLEGE OF NURSING
|Guidelines for Doctorally Prepared Faculty Role Differentiation
|Subsection: Appendix B1
|Section - Appendices
|Originating Date: January 2006
|Responsible Reviewing Agency:
The College of Nursing (CON) shoulders responsibility for effectively addressing its missions and meeting its responsibilities to the University of Nebraska Medical Center and to the state of Nebraska. The faculty of the College collectively assumes the responsibility and associated activity of fulfilling the teaching, research, service, and practice missions of the College in concert with the College's Strategic Plan.
Within this broad mandate, the relative proportion of effort devoted to each of the tripartite missions by any single faculty varies. While all faculty are expected to teach and participate in service, the relative weight of these and other activities varies according to the needs of the CON and the individual strengths and training of each faculty. When hired, faculty receive an offer letter, contract, and Appendix A of the employment agreement, with effort allocation for teaching, scholarship (teaching, research, practice), and service/practice to include any specific variations that are planned to occur in the percentage of time over the course of the contract period.
Doctorally prepared faculty are expected to be productive in a program of scholarship. Based on these considerations, faculty and their Assistant Dean mutually create an annual faculty activity plan that includes teaching and service, and in addition, a focused plan for scholarship, either teaching, research, or practice. A competitive start-up package may be negotiated by the Dean, Assistant Dean, and Associate Dean for Research (and Practice if applicable). The start-up package may include FTE effort allocation, equipment, travel, Graduate Assistant, etc., contingent on resources and candidate needs.
Scholarship in the areas of teaching, research, and practice is critical for the advancement of the discipline, for creating an optimal environment for student learning, and for meeting the College’s obligations to the University. Scholarship is defined as generating and disseminating new knowledge. New knowledge can be in any number of areas, for example, new teaching methods and models, data-based research, synthesis of extant knowledge, practice innovations, and the development of evidence-based practice guidelines and protocols. New knowledge is disseminated through scholarly publications in respected, peer-reviewed journals and presentations to regional, national, and international audiences. In addition, faculty shoulder the responsibility to bring in funding to support their scholarship. Faculty receive investment time for scholarship with the expectation that they will become funded for this effort. Tangible outcomes, such as funded grants and contracts and publications are considered the return on investment. Outcomes in relation to goals should be documented at each annual evaluation of faculty and considered in the negotiation process for allocation of effort.
II. Faculty Preferred Activity Plan Guidelines
The Dean and Executive Council annually assess the needs and resources of the College of Nursing for the next academic year. Division Deans collaborate with each other and the appropriate Associate Deans and Directors to determine teaching assignments so as to cover the courses of the College.
Three pathways for doctorally prepared faculty include being teaching, research, and practice scholars. Doctorally prepared faculty propose their professional goals for the next year and negotiate with their Assistant Dean for their activity plan.
Annual activity expectations for doctorally-prepared faculty
Doctorally-prepared faculty negotiate their preferred focus of scholarship among teaching, research, or practice. The two selected primary areas of accomplishment (Teaching, Scholarship [teaching, research, practice], and service/practice should be complimentary; one should support the other.
Annual Review of Research Effort with Associated Metrics
For faculty with FTE of < .20. Prior to Annual Evaluation with faculty, Mentor (if appropriate), Asst. Dean (or supervisor) and Associate Dean of Research and/or Associate Dean of Practice or Associate Dean of Academics shall meet to negotiate on Scholarship FTE for the following year.
For faculty with FTE > .30. A meeting every 6 months with faculty, Mentor (if appropriate) , Asst. Dean (or supervisor) and Associate Dean for Research for the first 3 years with this FTE allocation prior to Annual Evaluation of faculty. Meetings occur annually after the first 3 years. ADR and Assistant Dean should negotiate on research FTE for the following year. See table below for proposed Metrics associated with FTE allocation for all doctorally prepared faculty.
Table 1. Metrics and Review Schedule for Doctoral Prepared Faculty
|Table: all doctoral prepared faculty are expected to engage in Scholarship
|Scholarship (≤ .20 FTE)
|Research (≥ .30 FTE)
|Source of Funding
|Meetings q 6 mo. X 3yrs, then annual
|Infrastructure needed: Orientation, NNRC Editor access, grant review, mock review, NNRC search for available awards.
It is anticipated in the role of educator, faculty will have a program of scholarship for knowledge development related to teaching and training programs that contributes to the tripartite mission of the CON. Faculty will disseminate results in publications and presentations. Faculty will want to be recognized for teaching excellence beyond course evaluations, such as in requests for teaching consultation, service on local, regional, national and international boards, recipient of teaching awards, textbook awards, etc. Faculty who are focused on teaching excellence should negotiate substantial time for teaching scholarship, grant funding must be obtained, such as with training grants and funding for teaching innovations.
It is anticipated that in the role of researcher, faculty will have a research program for knowledge development (efficacy), effectiveness (testing in real world settings) or implementation science (integrated into systems, community etc.) that contributes to the tripartite mission of the CON. Their efforts should be disseminated in publications and presentations which indicate productivity as a researcher. Grant submissions and funding mechanisms must be pursued and is required in order for a faculty who wants to be recognized for research excellence in their faculty role and to negotiate substantial time for research. Research faculty should be leaders in local, regional, and national arenas with such activities as serving on research boards or councils, journal boards and study sections, councils for professional research organizations.
It is anticipated that in the role of clinician, faculty will have a practice that contributes to the tripartite mission of the CON. Their efforts should be disseminated in publications, white papers, guidelines and presentations which indicate productivity as a practitioner. Practice faculty should be leaders in local, regional, and national arenas with such activities as serving on practice boards, conducting quality improvement projects, translating research to practice, conducting evidence-based practice programs, and becoming funded for practice innovations and ventures. Practice faculty must generate income for time spent in service or as a practitioner as part of their faculty role at the CON.
Designation and metrics for FTE allocation in any of the roles is not fixed but rather is predicated on faculty’s past accountability, success, and future interests, which may change over time, and on the College’s need and resources to address the tri-partite mission of the CON. Division Deans will consider return on invested time in the role in negotiating assignments on a yearly basis. Division Deans are also responsible for assisting faculty with identifying the different roles that will result in promotion and tenure.