TY - JOUR
T1 - Evaluating Academic Scientists Collaborating in Team-Based Research
T2 - A Proposed Framework
AU - Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Research Design (BERD) Key Function Committee of the Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) Consortium
AU - Mazumdar, Madhu
AU - Messinger, Shari
AU - Finkelstein, Dianne M.
AU - Goldberg, Judith D.
AU - Lindsell, Christopher J.
AU - Morton, Sally C.
AU - Pollock, Brad H.
AU - Rahbar, Mohammad H.
AU - Welty, Leah J.
AU - Parker, Robert A.
AU - Ash, Arlene
AU - Carter, Rickey
AU - Delong, Elizabeth
AU - Fox, Erin
AU - Heagerty, Patrick
AU - Kopras, Elizabeth
AU - Macaluso, Maurizio
AU - Mayo, Matthew S.
AU - Oster, Robert
AU - Nietert, Paul J.
AU - Rao, Sowmya
AU - Shara, Nawar
AU - Spratt, Heidi
AU - Chang, Yu
AU - Blank, Arthur E.
AU - Carey, Tim
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
Copyright © 2015 by the Association of American Medical Colleges.
PY - 2015/10/1
Y1 - 2015/10/1
N2 - Criteria for evaluating faculty are traditionally based on a triad of scholarship, teaching, and service. Research scholarship is often measured by first or senior authorship on peer-reviewed scientific publications and being principal investigator on extramural grants. Yet scientific innovation increasingly requires collective rather than individual creativity, which traditional measures of achievement were not designed to capture and, thus, devalue. The authors propose a simple, flexible framework for evaluating team scientists that includes both quantitative and qualitative assessments. An approach for documenting contributions of team scientists in team-based scholarship, nontraditional education, and specialized service activities is also outlined. Although biostatisticians are used for illustration, the approach is generalizable to team scientists in other disciplines. The authors offer three key recommendations to members of institutional promotion committees, department chairs, and others evaluating team scientists. First, contributions to team-based scholarship and specialized contributions to education and service need to be assessed and given appropriate and substantial weight. Second, evaluations must be founded on well-articulated criteria for assessing the stature and accomplishments of team scientists. Finally, mechanisms for collecting evaluative data must be developed and implemented at the institutional level. Without these three essentials, contributions of team scientists will continue to be undervalued in the academic environment.
AB - Criteria for evaluating faculty are traditionally based on a triad of scholarship, teaching, and service. Research scholarship is often measured by first or senior authorship on peer-reviewed scientific publications and being principal investigator on extramural grants. Yet scientific innovation increasingly requires collective rather than individual creativity, which traditional measures of achievement were not designed to capture and, thus, devalue. The authors propose a simple, flexible framework for evaluating team scientists that includes both quantitative and qualitative assessments. An approach for documenting contributions of team scientists in team-based scholarship, nontraditional education, and specialized service activities is also outlined. Although biostatisticians are used for illustration, the approach is generalizable to team scientists in other disciplines. The authors offer three key recommendations to members of institutional promotion committees, department chairs, and others evaluating team scientists. First, contributions to team-based scholarship and specialized contributions to education and service need to be assessed and given appropriate and substantial weight. Second, evaluations must be founded on well-articulated criteria for assessing the stature and accomplishments of team scientists. Finally, mechanisms for collecting evaluative data must be developed and implemented at the institutional level. Without these three essentials, contributions of team scientists will continue to be undervalued in the academic environment.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84957587656&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84957587656&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000759
DO - 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000759
M3 - Review article
C2 - 25993282
AN - SCOPUS:84957587656
SN - 1040-2446
VL - 90
SP - 1302
EP - 1308
JO - Academic Medicine
JF - Academic Medicine
IS - 10
ER -