skip to content »

Fulbright & Jaworski L.L.P. Faculty Excellence Award

Houston, Texas

Collaborations are integral to the success of our mission areas.
Office of Faculty Development
not shown on screen

Review Process and Panel

A primary and secondary reviewer is designated for each submission. These reviewers will propose initial ratings for all criteria, and lead the discussion of the mini-portfolio during the review meeting. All members of the Review Panel will assign up to 100 points to each mini-portfolio based on how well the mini-portfolio matches the standards for a given awards category. To receive an award, the average number of points assigned by Review Panel members must meet or exceed the established cutoff of 80 points, and 75 percent of the reviewers must have given a minimum score of 80. Panelists will assume that the examples used to establish the standard would receive an average of 85 to 95 points.

The process primary and secondary reviewers will use in assigning points will be subdivided into three criteria as illustrated below:

Criteria Maximum Points
1. Quality (e.g., success of teaching) (using criteria of scholarship-see below)
  • Clarity of goals
5 points
  • Adequacy of personal preparation and ongoing self-reflection/improvement*
10 points
  • Adequacy of methods, quality of presentation and results
30 points
2. Quantity (e.g., amount of teaching) 40 points
3. Breadth (e.g., diversity of teaching) 15 points
TOTAL 100 points
Minimum average necessary to receive award 80 points
Average of examples used to set standards 85-90 points

*Evidence for these criteria are primarily presented in the personal

(From Scholarship Assessed, Glassik, Huber, and Maeroff, 1997)

Review Panel (as of Spring 2014)

Name

Institution

Aimee Garcia, M.D.

Medicine, BCM

Andrew Harper, M.D.

Psychiatry, UT

Anita Deswal, M.D.

Medicine, Cardiology

Anne Gill, Dr.P.H., M.S.,R.N.

Office of Undergraduate Medical Education, BCM

Austin J. Cooney, Ph.D.

Molecular and Cell Biology

Bajaj Mandeep, M.D.

Medicine and Endocrinology

Carol M. Wiggs, Ph.D, R.N.,C.N.M.

School of Nursing, UTMB

Charles C. Kilpatrick, M.D.

OB/GYN, UT Health Science Center- Houston

David A. Young

Pediatrics, Anesthesiology

Deborah C. Hsu, M.D.

Pediatrics- Emergency Medicine

Elizabeth Nelson, M.D.

Medicine, BCM

Faye Tan, M.D.

Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, BCM

Gary Rosenfeld, Ph.D.

UTHSC-Medical School

Geeta Singhal, M.D.

Pediatrics, BCM

Glenn Levine, M.D.

Medicine, BCM

Gordon Schutze, M.D.

Pediatrics, BCM

Harold Henson, B.S.,MeD, RDH

Periodontics & Dental Hygiene

James Lomax, M.D.

Psychiatry, BCM

James Walker, C.R.N.A., M.S.

Anesthesiology, BCM

Jeffery T. Bates, M.D.

Medicine, BCM

Jeffery Starke, M.D.

Pediatrics, BCM

Joan Friedland, M.D., M.P.H.

Medicine, BCM

John Coverdale, M.D.

Psychiatry & Behavorial Sciences, BCM

Joseph Chorley, M.D.

Pediatrics

Joseph Kass, M.D.

Neurology, BCM

Kanta Velamuri, M.D.

Medicine, Pulmonary

Karen Novak, D.D.S.,M.S.,Ph.D.

School of Dentistry, UT

Laura Torres, M.D.

Pediatrics Anesthesiology, BCM

Mark J. Harbott, M.D.

Anesthesiology

Martin Lorin, M.D.

Pediatrics, BCM

Michael Coburn, M.D.

Urology, BCM

Nancy Weigel, Ph.D.

Cell Biology, BCM

Oluyinka Olutoye, M.D.

Pediatrics, BCM

Robert J. McLaughlin, Ph.D.

Allied Health

Ruth Falik, M.D.

Medicine, BCM

Steen Pedersen, Ph.D.

Molecular Physiology, BCM

Suryakanta Velamuri, MBBS, B.S.

Medicine, BCM

Susan P. Raine, M.D., J.P.

OB/GYN

Sylvia J. Hysong, Ph.D.

Medicine, Health Services Research

Teresa K. Duryea, M.D.

Pediatrics, Academic General

Teri Turner, M.D., M.P.H,. M.Ed.

Pediatrics, BCM

Review Panel Guidelines

Criteria for Determining Quality of Scholarship

Criteria Clarifying Questions*
Clear, realistic and important goals and/or philosophy
  • Is the educational endeavor important to mission of College?
  • Are goals specific and obtainable?
  • Are goals consistent with stated leadership philosophy?
  • Do goals reflect needs of profession, society, learners, other faculty?
  • Is the development of enduring materials guided by a cohesive set of professional goals?
  • Is researchers' line of research important to the field?
Adequate preparation
  • Is teacher prepared to teach effectively?
  • Does leader strive to continuously learn new ways of dealing with challenging issues?
  • Does educator take advantage of educator development opportunities (MTFP, peer review, skill building workshops)?
  • Does faculty have skills matching his/her role in preparing enduring educational materials?
  • Is researcher qualified to conduct research effectively?
Appropriate methods
  • Does teacher use appropriate teaching techniques?
  • Is design of the course effective?
  • Does leader get others meaningfully involved?
  • Are actions consistent with current literature?
  • Are systematic instructional design methods used to prepare enduring educational materials?
  • Is design of study appropriate?
  • Does study have sufficient statistical power?
Meaningful results
  • Does the educational strategy (e.g., teaching method, course management) serve as model for others?
  • Were stated goals achieved?
  • Do learners use the enduring educational materials as intended? Are desired learning outcomes achieved?
  • Does research study lead to outcomes worthy of publication in the literature?
Effective presentation (Sharing strategies or experiences with peers)
  • Are "lessons" learned about teaching, educational leadership or the preparation of enduring educational materials shared with peers at local, regional, or national levels?
  • Do peer reviewers for grant, journal, and/or educational award find the presentation of results understandable and credible?
  • Is write-up of research results credible to a local, regional and/or national audience?
Reflective critique
  • Does teacher, leader, or developer solicit and use feedback from learners and peers?
  • Does educator examine multiple perspectives before changing strategies?
  • Does researcher solicit and effectively use advice from colleagues/mentors?
(From Scholarship Assessed, Glassik, Huber, and Maeroff, 1997)

*These questions illustrate how the criteria apply to multiple areas of scholarship, including scientific and educational research. Based on the award category, members of the peer review panel will look for answers to questions such as these in the information you present in your mini-portfolio.

E-mail this page to a friend