Identifying and Weighting Teaching and Scholarship Activities Among Faculty Members

Concern over career advancement and the use of appropriate criteria in the evaluation of faculty members has been expressed among scholars in higher education, in general, and specifically within colleges and schools of pharmacy.1 Wolfgang, Gupchup, and Plake found that in addition to their efforts in teaching being undervalued, faculty members perceived that the criteria used to evaluate productivity in teaching, scholarship, and service were not appropriately weighted by school and university administrators, who place too much emphasis on obtaining extramural funds.1 During the past 2 decades, pharmacy educators have attempted to develop more systematic means of evaluating the productivity of faculty members. Gagnon published rankings of journals in 5 pharmacy disciplines in 1986.2 Wolfgang et al undertook a more comprehensive evaluation of journals in which pharmacy administration faculty members may publish.3 Smith and McCaffrey followed up that study with a comparison among faculty members and deans of the importance of publishing in various journals in pharmacy administration in making tenure and promotion decisions.4 In 1991, Calligaro et al compared the productivity and time spent in teaching, research, service, and committee activities among faculty in administration, medicinal chemistry, pharmaceutics/pharmacokinetics, pharmacology/toxicology and pharmacy practice.5 They also identified sources of funding and impediments to research activity. Prior to the current study, administration at the Duquesne University’s Mylan School of Pharmacy (MSOP) had implemented the following to evaluate the performance and productivity of its faculty members: • student teaching effectiveness questionnaires; • a peer review program; • faculty yearly review by the Division Head and Dean grounded in individual faculty-developed yearly goals; and • faculty-prepared annual reports that attempt to uniformly quantify the faculty member’s contribution to the School, University, and community. These processes are used in combination with other management methods to provide individual recognition and reward as well as to support the promotion and tenure process and to gauge the productivity of the School’s Divisions collectively. In response to requests American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education 2004; 68 (4) Article 90.