University of Iowa College of Public Health

Department of Biostatistics

Performance, Promotion,

and Tenure Guidelines for

Tenure Track Faculty

Revised: August, 2020

Original Guidelines Approved: October 17, 2005

Revised Guidelines Approved: August 17, 2020

Note: This document is intended to be used as a set of guidelines only. It

supplements, and does not replace, the current University of Iowa Operations Manual.

Collegiate procedures for the promotion review process are detailed in the College of

Public Health Guidelines on Promotion and Tenure.

Department of Biostatistics Mission Statement

The overall mission of the Department of Biostatistics has four primary components.

The first component is to provide exemplary education, training, and mentoring for

students in the Department of Biostatistics, the College of Public Health, and the

University of Iowa. The second component is to conduct and disseminate outstanding

disciplinary methodological research that advances the practice of Biostatistics and

related fields. The third component is to collaborate with other investigators, especially

from the College of Public Health, the University of Iowa, and the State of Iowa, to

conduct and disseminate interdisciplinary applied research that has a meaningful impact

on the biomedical and public health sciences. The fourth component is to serve and

promote the Department of Biostatistics, the College of Public Health, the University of

Iowa, and the State of Iowa, as well as professional associations, organizations, and

communities both within and outside of the discipline.

General Principles

Biostatistics has evolved from the broader field of Statistics, and is properly viewed in the

general domain of STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) disciplines.

Academic biostatisticians use their expertise to not only advance Biostatistics, Statistics,

and related fields, but also to advance other empirically oriented sciences, especially those in

biology, medicine and public health.

Faculty in Biostatistics are routinely involved in two kinds of teaching:

disciplinary teaching of biostatistical methods, concepts, computation,

programming. applications, and theory to Biostatistics graduate students;

ii)

cross-disciplinary teaching of biostatistical methods, concepts,

computation, and applications to non-Biostatistics graduate students,

undergraduate students, and others outside of the field, often referred to

as “service” teaching.

Faculty are expected to demonstrate excellence in either or both types of teaching,

depending on the nature of their course assignments. This expectation is elaborated

upon in the next section.

Faculty in Biostatistics are expected to demonstrate excellence in two kinds of research:

research that advances the discipline of Biostatistics or related fields

(Statistics, Data Science, etc.) through methodological, computational, or

theoretical innovation, often referred to as “methodological” research;

ii)

research that applies existing techniques for study design, data analysis, and

analytical interpretation in collaborative interdisciplinary investigations, often

referred to as “interdisciplinary” research.

This expectation is also elaborated upon in the next section.

Several important differences should be noted between scholarship and research

activities in the Department of Biostatistics

and other departments in the College of

Public Health.

Methodological research endeavors generally involve fewer investigators

and necessitate a considerable investment of time and innovation. Such

contributions are therefore produced less frequently than those based

on interdisciplinary research.

ii)

Biostatistics faculty may develop esteemed scholarly reputations without

necessarily being the principal investigator on grants; however, evidence

of leadership is important for promotion.

iii)

Biostatistical interdisciplinary research occurs not only in public health, but also

across the health sciences and in other disciplines, such as psychology,

sociology, ecology, geography, law, engineering, etc.

The combination of disciplinary and cross-disciplinary teaching and research is important

to recognize in the promotion and tenure process.

Biostatistics faculty typically receive their doctoral degrees in Biostatistics or Statistics.

Some Biostatistics faculty may have moved to a Department of Biostatistics either from a

Department of Statistics or from a clinical department in a biomedical research

environment (e.g., a College of Medicine, a nonprofit academic medical center, etc.). In

either case, the academic record for such faculty may be very different from those who

were trained and started their careers in a Department of Biostatistics. For faculty

having made such a transition, a guiding

principle is that they should

not be penalized

for time spent in their previous professional environment when being considered for

promotion in the Department of Biostatistics. This principle is expanded upon at the

end of the document.

The University of Iowa Operations Manual and the College of Public Health Faculty

Handbook provide information on the criteria for promotion that are not

repeated

here. The following guidelines are to give specificity to these criteria and interpret

them in the context of the Department of Biostatistics.

Performance Expectations

Teaching

Both disciplinary and cross-disciplinary teaching are an integral part of the mission of

the

Department of Biostatistics. Faculty are expected to demonstrate excellence in

either or both types of teaching, depending on the nature of their assignments.

The following provides the key indicators of teaching performance for Biostatistics

faculty.

Student evaluations, based on both ratings and comments.

a. Student evaluations are important, but are subject to biases and other

shortcomings. For example, they tend to be less favorable for required versus

elective courses,

for larger versus smaller classes, and for service courses

versus disciplinary

courses. Moreover, evaluations completed via online

portals can be heavily impacted by nonresponse bias, and might primarily

reflect the perspectives of those with strong opinions about the course

(either favorable or unfavorable). Therefore, in interpreting student

evaluations, limitations should be taken into account. When possible,

evaluations for an instructor of a course should be compared to

evaluations

of other instructors for the same course, taught during previous semesters.

However, given the long history of excellent teaching in the department,

scores below the mean do not always indicate poor teaching. The

evaluations of a candidate for promotion will also be compared with the

evaluations of faculty members at or above the rank to which promotion is

being considered, and should be similar to those of higher rank. Evaluations

are expected to be consistently

strong or to show a record of improvement

over time.

b. The distribution of ratings from student evaluations is more informative than

summary statistics such as medians or means. Comments are also helpful.

c. In service classes, especially those at the introductory level where the

audience is large, occasional negative ratings and/or comments are

commonplace and should not be unduly emphasized in the promotion

process unless they reflect a recurring issue or problem.

Peer evaluations of teaching.

For candidates for promotion, such assessments should be approximately

equivalent to those of faculty

at the rank to which promotion is being considered.

Evaluations should also be

consistently excellent or show a record of

improvement over time.

Teaching awards or other formal recognition of teaching excellence.

Professional development activities in teaching through participation in workshops

at the University of Iowa and at professional conferences and meetings.

Successful mentoring of student research.

a. Candidates for promotion from assistant to associate professor are expected

devote less effort to mentoring student research than faculty members

with

tenure. Establishing a research agenda in the first few years of the

career of a junior faculty member should be prioritized over advising

doctoral dissertations. Junior faculty, however, should contribute to

mentoring student research to the extent

appropriate, for example, by

serving as a member of a doctoral student’s dissertation

committee, by

supervising MS preceptorships, by supervising undergraduate research

projects, and/or by serving on exam and dissertation committees for non-

Biostatistics students.

b. For promotion from assistant to associate professor, serving as an adviser of

a PhD dissertation is not a requirement. However, a junior faculty member

should be in a position to start advising a doctoral student

towards the end

of the probationary period. Doctoral advising before that time is

laudable

and meritorious, but should be undertaken with caution.

c. Candidates for promotion from associate professor to full professor are

expected to participate in student research mentoring by supervising MS

preceptorships, serving on dissertation committees for Biostatistics students,

and serving on exam and dissertation committees for non-Biostatistics students.

However, candidates are also required to have successfully advised the

dissertation of at least one doctoral student (or co-advised as the primary

mentor) through the final acceptance of the document.

d. At the time of initial appointment to the University of Iowa, some temporary

reduction in teaching may be granted to facilitate the transition. Apart from

such initial reduction, candidates for consideration for tenure are expected

to have followed the collegiate and departmental norm of teaching two

semester-long courses per year. Once tenure has been granted, however,

the

post-tenure effort allocation policy allows for more flexibility, and a

tenured

associate professor being considered for promotion to full professor

may have deviated from the norm in teaching effort.

Scholarship/Research

Faculty in Biostatistics are expected to maintain a scholarship agenda that involves both

disciplinary methodological research and interdisciplinary applied collaborative research.

As with other academic Biostatistics units at peer institutions, a record of substantive

and sustained contributions representing both types of research is required for the granting

of tenure in the Department of Biostatistics.

Methodological research advances the discipline of Biostatistics or Statistics through

methodological, computational, or theoretical innovation. Such research does not

generally need to involve the collection and primary analysis of data and is not necessarily

focused on the health sciences. Methodological research often involves the

development of novel statistical or computational techniques for the analysis or modeling

of data, or for the design of experimental or observational studies. It may also involve

the improvement of the practice of Biostatistics, such as the development of better

methods of teaching, consulting, or conducting clinical studies. Methodological

research is generally published in journals thematically focused on Biostatistics,

Statistics, and related fields, but may occasionally appear in more applied journals.

Published papers and/or software may take years to materialize. The peer-review

publication process for methodological papers tends to be slow relative to most applied

sciences, because refereeing such work may necessitate evaluating computing

algorithms, mathematical derivations and/or proofs, etc.

Methodological publications in journals focused on Biostatistics, Statistics, and related

fields generally have fewer coauthors than is the norm for many of the applied

disciplines represented in a College of Public

Health. Only investigators who have played

a substantive role in the research are listed. Authorship order is usually based on either

of the following conventions: (1) for projects involving a student collaborator (e.g., a

doctoral advisee or graduate research assistant), the student is often granted first

authorship with the faculty mentor appearing last; (2) for projects not involving a

student collaborator, the authors are often ordered in accordance to the extent of their

involvement. If there is potential for the order of authorship to be misleading with

respect to their contributions, a candidate for promotion is encouraged to provide an

explanation and description of the role that they played in such manuscripts.

Creative scholarship in Biostatistics can take several forms other than traditional peer-

reviewed papers. In particular, published software should be recognized and valued.

When distributed through an open source platform (such as R), statistical software has

the potential to meaningfully advance the discipline, especially if the software is heavily

used and well maintained. The combination of published software accompanied by a peer-

reviewed publication that describes the methodology and the use of the software can result

in widespread exposure for both contributions.

For candidates for promotion from assistant to associate professor, methodological

contributions

that go beyond the PhD thesis are required. A reasonable goal would be

4 to 6

such publications, depending on the quality and impact. These contributions could

be based on extensions of the dissertation research or on new directions. If the number

of contributions is minimal, the publications

would need to be of very high quality and

high impact. In general, at least some of the publications should be first authored,

unless independence and innovative leadership can be otherwise established.

Among associate professors, the number of additional methodological publications may

vary greatly, depending on the emphasis and leadership in interdisciplinary work.

Nevertheless, some minimal amount of methodological research (e.g., 3 or 4 peer-

reviewed publications since becoming an associate professor) would still be expected

for promotion to full professor.

Interdisciplinary research is applied research that arises through collaborations with

other fields. Determining the most appropriate statistical techniques to use in designing

a study and in analyzing or modeling data is a scientific research activity that requires

leadership, expertise, and innovation. Biostatistical leadership in collaborative research

does not typically lead to first authorship, but may lead to being second or third author

in many cases.

Leadership in interdisciplinary research can also facilitate national and international

recognition, which is often indicated by invitations to speak at non-statistical scientific

conferences and workshops, invitations to organize scientific sessions, refereeing and

editorship activities for non-statistical journals, and participation on peer-review panels

of non-statistical research

proposals.

Because biostatistical leadership may not be readily apparent in a junior faculty

member’s dossier, the Departmental Executive Officer (DEO), in consultation with the

candidate and the Departmental Consulting Group (DCG),

may request reference

letters from collaborators that specifically focus on the candidate’s biostatistical

leadership. Ideally, these letters would be included in the dossier at the time of its

submission. Such collaborators may be asked to comment on the

candidate’s

contributions to the collaborative research endeavors (for example, their role in writing

grant

proposals), the independence of their research contributions, and the impact of

their contributions to the field in which the collaboration occurs.

Junior faculty are encouraged to focus their interdisciplinary efforts in a small number

of areas so that they can gain a deeper understanding of the underlying science, which

should improve the quality and the relevance of their statistical contributions. This is

not required, however, and may not always be feasible or warranted.

For candidates for promotion to associate professor, a reasonable goal would be 6 to 10

interdisciplinary publications, depending on the level of leadership reflected by the

work.

Summary and Key Indicators: The ultimate reflection of performance in research is a

national or international

reputation for advancing the state of knowledge in the field.

Different individuals possess

different strengths and weaknesses, and have different

focal areas of methodological and applied expertise. Such diversity is desirable.

In the promotion process, it should be recognized that the evaluation of research quality

and impact is highly subjective, even among those with expertise in the topic area.

Based on peer-review publications, the following may be viewed as key indicators of

performance for research and scholarship for Biostatistics faculty.

External reviews

a. The intent of external promotion and tenure reviews is to provide an

objective

evaluation by individuals who are experts in the candidate’s

areas of research. These evaluations should play a major role in the

promotion and/or tenure process, especially if the candidate’s

methodological research expertise is not represented among the

departmental faculty involved in the decision.

b. As a general rule, evaluations by frequent coauthors, former thesis

advisors, former colleagues, or close friends are to be avoided. Evaluations

experts who have not had such relationships with the candidate should

sought.

c. Although external reviewers can and do comment on performance in the

areas

of teaching and service, their assessments of the candidate’s

contributions to

knowledge in the field are primarily important.

Citation frequency

Although imperfect, one objective measure of research impact is citation

frequency. Given the lag between the publication of a paper and citation

accumulations, in general, it would be

inappropriate to set any specific

quantitative expectation for citation frequency

for candidates for promotion

from assistant to associate professor.

Nonetheless, some indication of increasing

citation frequency helps to

demonstrate scholarly achievement.

Journal reputation

The quality of a published paper should be

judged primarily by content, which is

sometimes reflected by the overall prestige of the journal where the publication

appears. However, certain caveats apply. First, highly selective journals are often

hesitant to publish work unless it pertains to a topic where the current level of

disciplinary interest is substantial. Second, quality publications may appear in

respected journals that are not broadly perceived to be in the top tier. Third,

truly innovative papers that challenge conventional practice are sometimes

difficult to publish in highly selective journals, but over time may have a large

impact.

Authorship order

a. For methodological publications, solo authored and first authored papers

serve as a reflection of independence and/or innovative leadership. First

authored papers from graduate advisees, where the faculty member served

as a mentor and helped to define and direct the research, should be given

comparable weight. Faculty who collaborate with graduate students on

methodological contributions are encouraged to allow the students to serve

as first author on the resulting publication, provided that the work invested

by the student warrants such recognition. Faculty are also strongly

encouraged to work with their doctoral advisees to publish at least one

paper based on the dissertation research.

b. For collaborative interdisciplinary publications, first authored papers (albeit

rare) generally demonstrate a mastery of the content area, as well as

leadership. Biostatisticians often serve as second authors on collaborative

papers where the statistical aspects of the research are substantive, and the

biostatistician played an essential role in designing the study and/or

analyzing the data. In disciplines where the last author is reserved for the

senior author, this role often reflects expertise and leadership in

conceptualizing and guiding the study. However, because interdisciplinary

publications often feature a large number of authors, biostatisticians who

play a crucial role in the research may appear virtually anywhere in the

author list.

Research funding

a. External research funding is an essential element of the fiscal health of the

Department of Biostatistics and the College of Public Health. Funding

for

methodological research is scarce (especially through the NIH or the CDC);

consequently, funding as a principal in or co-principal investigator is not

required for a biostatistician. However, the pursuit of such funding is quite

laudable and is strongly encouraged. The award of a grant that funds

methodological research indicates that the research is both novel and

important, and that it has been favorably reviewed by peers. Such awards

should therefore be highly valued in the promotion process. Most of the

funding that comprises the portfolio for a Biostatistics faculty member will

be based on serving as a co-investigator on collaborative research grants.

Biostatisticians should play a key scientific leadership role on research

projects. The most relevant quantitative measures of funding for

Biostatistics faculty relate to (i) the total faculty effort and (ii) funding

procured to support

Biostatistics graduate research assistantships.

Leadership roles on

funded research projects are required for promotion to

full professor and can

be demonstrated by serving as a biostatistical co-

investigator who is integrally involved in the research and serves as an

essential member of the team. Examples of substantive leadership roles

would be serving as a director of a biostatistical core for a major project, or

serving as the long-term biostatistician for an interdisciplinary team that has

a successful track record of procuring large grants.

b. Candidates applying for tenure and promotion from assistant to associate

professor should have met the expectation of offsetting 50% of their salary

through external research funding. Ideally, this should be done within the

first three years of the appointment. Once the 50% level is achieved, the

candidate should try to maintain this level for each fiscal year.

c. Candidates for promotion from associate to full professor should

consistently meet or exceed the departmental and collegiate expectation of

offsetting 50% of their salary through external research funding. Note,

however, that the post tenure

effort allocation policy allows for deviation

from the departmental norm for

tenured faculty. If funded effort is

increased then classroom teaching effort and

service expectations may be

decreased appropriately, or vice-versa.

d. Although funding as a principal or co-principal investigator on a grant is not

required for promotion to any rank, it

is noteworthy and supports the case

for promotion.

Invited presentations at meetings, conferences, or departmental colloquium /

seminar series.

Research awards or other formal recognition of research excellence.

Finally, as stated earlier, published software should be recognized and valued in the

assessment of methodological research contributions. A common avenue for

dissemination is to publish a package in an open source platform (with R being the most

widely known and used). Another avenue for distribution is to make the software

available for public use via a website or a development platform (such as GitHub). The

development and maintenance of a software package, a program, or an application is a

time-consuming process that requires innovation and skill, and such endeavors often

lead to substantive advancements in the discipline. However, since software is often

used without appropriate citation, other indicators of impact should also be taken into

consideration.

Quantifying the impact of published statistical software can be challenging, but several

metrics are available. If accompanied by a publication, the best measure is typically the

number of times the publication has been cited. However, software is often used

without being cited, so other indicators of impact should also be taken into

consideration. In particular, the number of times the software has been downloaded

and the frequency with which the software is listed as a dependency by other packages

are both imperfect albeit useful measures (e.g., Depends/Imports/Suggests, for CRAN

packages). Likewise, other distribution platforms often provide their own measures of

software impact (e.g. "stars" on GitHub). Invited presentations or demonstrations to

discuss the software also serve as a meaningful reflection of impact and utility.

Service

Because of the cross-disciplinary nature of Biostatistics, professional service for a

biostatistician is cross-disciplinary as well as disciplinary, and may include service to

public health, other health sciences, and related disciplines.

Candidates for promotion from assistant to associate professor with tenure are

expected to demonstrate effective service at the departmental and collegiate level. As

faculty members progress throughout their careers, an increasing commitment to

service should be evident at the university and the national/international level.

Candidates for promotion from associate to full professor are expected to demonstrate

effective

service at the local level (i.e., departmental, collegiate, university) and at the

national/international level.

Service effectiveness is challenging to evaluate, but perhaps the best indicator is

demand: a faculty member who is asked to serve in several service capacities is likely

fulfilling the obligations of these roles responsibly and successfully.

The following

are key indicators of service performance for Biostatistics faculty.

Service on departmental, collegiate, or university committees.

Service as a peer reviewer for a disciplinary or cross-disciplinary journal.

Service as a reviewer of NIH/CDC/NSF/NSA/VA grant proposals.

Service on the editorial board of a scientific journal.

Service as a journal editor.

Service on committees for a scientific or professional organization.

Service as an officer of a scientific or professional organization.

Service as a session organizer at scientific meetings.

Participation on boards or task forces at the community, regional, national or

international level.

10.

Service to the State of Iowa.

Tenure and Promotion

In general, the award of tenure is a much more momentous decision than the approval

of a promotion for a candidate with tenure. For candidates for promotion from

assistant to associate professor, the

tenure decision is tied to the promotion decision.

For faculty initially appointed as an

untenured associate or full professor, the

performance expectations for tenure at

that rank would be equivalent to the

expectations for promotion to that rank.

Specific performance criteria during the

candidate’s probationary period at the University of

Iowa are difficult to specify, as

individuals may vary greatly in their experience before their UI

appointment. An

individual who had been primarily in a clinical research position elsewhere may

have an

extensive record of interdisciplinary collaborative research, but may not have had the

opportunity to

demonstrate excellence in methodological research or teaching, which

would be required for the granting of tenure at the University of Iowa. In contrast, an

individual with a research record of

primarily methodological research and teaching

elsewhere may need to demonstrate

excellence in interdisciplinary collaborative

research at the University of Iowa for the granting of tenure. An individual who

has

held a position where the amount of funded effort is high is unlikely to have a prolific

record of methodological research.

Candidates with post-doctoral research experience prior to their appointment at the

University of Iowa,

either as a post-doctoral scholar or as a faculty member elsewhere,

will often have publications based on research that was conducted during that

appointment. While such prior publications add to the candidate’s overall body of

research and should be considered as part of the evaluation, additional publications

during the probationary

period at the University of Iowa typically would be necessary

to provide evidence of

an ongoing high level of research productivity, which is required

for promotion and tenure. An important exception would be if a candidate at the

associate professor level was being

considered for tenure alone, having been appointed

at the associate level for their initial University of Iowa appointment. In this case, the

time from appointment to promotion

might be very short, and the candidate’s research

record might be primarily based on research done

elsewhere.

For candidates for promotion from associate professor to full professor, research done

since the appointment as associate professor provides evidence of an ongoing high

level of

research productivity and will serve as the primary basis for further promotion

to full professor. For promotion to full professor, the balance between methodological

and interdisciplinary research may vary widely among individuals. The majority

of the

research may be in either one or the other domain, or may be evenly balanced

between the

two. In either case, evidence of leadership is required. As explained

previously,

leadership in the discipline of Biostatistics may be demonstrated in several

ways, and not

only through first authorship of papers or being a principal investigator

on grants. First authorship on a substantial number of publications is

therefore not

required for the discipline of Biostatistics in order to demonstrate

“Continued artistic

or scholarly achievement of high quality, accompanied by

unmistakable evidence that

the candidate is a nationally and, where applicable,

internationally recognized scholar

or creative artist in the chosen field.” as articulated

in the University of Iowa

Operations Manual,

Section III.10.4 (as of June 2020).

Promotion to full professor does

require unmistakable evidence that the candidate is

a nationally recognized scholar in

the field of Biostatistics. Similarly, principal or co-principal investigator status on grants

is not required. If the candidate has pursued primarily interdisciplinary collaborative

research, then biostatistical leadership may be reflected in being the

lead

biostatistician on grants.

Professional Transitions to Biostatistics

Biostatistics faculty are expected to be engaged in both collaborative interdisciplinary

research and methodological disciplinary research. As with other academic Biostatistics

units at peer institutions, a record of substantive and sustained contributions representing

both types of research is required for the granting of tenure in the Department of

Biostatistics at the University of Iowa.

Some Biostatistics faculty may have moved to a Department of Biostatistics either from a

Department of Statistics or from a clinical department in a biomedical research

environment (e.g., a College of Medicine, a nonprofit academic medical center, etc.). In

either case, the criteria for promotion may be very different from those in a

Department of Biostatistics. It is important to understand these

distinctions when

evaluating a candidate for promotion or tenure who has made such a transition.

Departments of Statistics (as well as Mathematical Sciences, Mathematics, and

Computer Science)

typically do not require collaborative interdisciplinary research, and

tenure and promotion is often granted entirely on

the basis of teaching and

methodological disciplinary research. In fact, some of these departments do not

value applied collaborative research and actively discourage faculty from undertaking it.

A faculty member in a clinical department or in a biomedical research environment will

likely have an extensive record of interdisciplinary collaborative research. Since

external funding expectations are generally high for such positions, the record of

research supported by grants or contracts will likely be substantial. However, such

faculty may have had limited opportunities to conduct methodological research or to

teach traditional classes.

For faculty having made a transition from another type of appointment, a guiding

principle is that they should

not be penalized for time spent in their previous

professional environment when being considered for promotion in the Department of

Biostatistics. Their record should be

evaluated bearing in mind the different activities

and expectations in their previous position.