Interview Chapters

Processing Information:

In accordance with oral history best practices, this transcript was intentionally created to preserve the conversational language of the interview sessions. (Language has not been edited to conform to written prose).
The interview subject was given the opportunity to review the transcript. Any requested editorial changes are indicated in brackets [ ], and the audio file has not correspondingly altered.
Redactions to the transcript and audio files may have been made in response to the interview subject’s request or to eliminate personal health information in compliance with HIPAA.

The views expressed in this interview are solely the perspective of the interview subject. They are not to be interpreted as the official view of any other individual or of The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center.

Printing is not supported at the primary Gallery Thumbnail page. Please first navigate to a specific Image before printing.

Switch View to List View Slideshow

Chapter 05: Bringing Massage to the Place of Wellness and Integrative Medicine

Pamela Sat Siri Sumler and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

Ms. Sumler explains that she eventually was offered a contract position to offer chair massages for "brief relaxation" in patient waiting areas. She explains why the massage was labeled in that way and talks about progress made in creating an inviting space for patients at the Place of Wellness. She also discusses training she received in massage therapy at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in 2002.
Chapter 06: Massage: Benefits to Patients

Pamela Sat Siri Sumler and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this chapter, Ms. Sumler talks about what massage offers the cancer patient and tells several stories about patients' reactions to massage. She also discusses the supportive attitude of many MD Anderson clinicians, particularly in rehabilitative and supportive care. She notes that to document the safety of massage in the first three years of the massage program, she took patients' vital signs before and after massage.

Next, Ms. Sumler talks briefly about the value of yoga for oncology patients. She ends this chapter with comments about how massage makes her contemplative practices manifest.
Chapter 07: Training Massage Therapists and Building Institutional Acceptance for Massage

Pamela Sat Siri Sumler and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this chapter, Ms. Sumler talks about her work building a training program for massage therapists. She talks about the importance of critical thinking for massage therapists who have been trained to work with healthy populations. She gives examples of how critical thinking comes in to work with cancer patients. She says, "you are not taught what you don't know, and that's what you need to not harm someone."

Next, Ms. Sumler gives examples of how MD Anderson staff have accepted massage as part of a patient's experience and treatment.
Chapter 08: Patient Acceptance (or Non-Acceptance) of Massage Therapy

Pamela Sat Siri Sumler and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this chapter, Ms. Sumler talks about why patients in general may resist getting massage, and how cancer patients deal with special issues of vulnerability in massage. She also talks about the positive impact of massage on patients, recounting anecdotes to underscore the role of massage in reconnecting patients positively with their bodies. She also discusses how positive personal experiences with massage can lead patients to consider other complementary services, and vice versa.
Chapter 09: Clinician Acceptance (or Non-Acceptance) of Massage Therapy

Pamela Sat Siri Sumler and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this chapter, Ms. Sumler talks about why clinicians may refuse to send their patients for therapeutic massage, usually out of a lack of information about how specifically this type of massage is tailored to the needs and limitations of patients undergoing specific treatments. She gives examples of how she and others in massage therapy opened communications with clinicians to provide education and overcome resistance.
Chapter 10: Contributing to Research on the Value of Massage

Pamela Sat Siri Sumler and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this chapter, Ms. Sumler sketches her participation in research into the value of massage for patients with peripheral neuropathy and deep vein thrombosis. She also discusses how her own perspective on massage changed through these collaborations. She explains how one study led to a change in the organization of the scheduling of massage.
Chapter 11: A Few Words about Yoga and Views on MD Anderson's New Directions

Pamela Sat Siri Sumler and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

Ms. Sumler begins this chapter by speaking briefly about teaching yoga at MD Anderson and how acceptance of that service has grown.

Next, she reflects on the new direction MD Anderson seems to be taking under Dr. Peter Pisters, who became the institution's fifth president after Ronald DePinho's resignation. CLIP She says she feels that "a new light is shining" and she sees a new commitment to the institution's commitment to care and compassion and its mission to support both patients and employees. She has hopes that acceptance of Integrative Medicine will continue to grow.
Chapter 12: Reflections on Contributions and on the Art of Massage, Meditation, and Teaching

Pamela Sat Siri Sumler and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this chapter, Ms. Sumler reflects on the contributions that have meant the most to her and stresses that she loves to learn, and will continue to expand her knowledge of therapeutic massage during the rest of her time at the institution. At the end of the interview, she talks about her core identity as a meditation practitioner and an artist. She explains how these two currents combine her view of yoga, teaching, and massage as art forms.
Chapter 01: Inspired to Enter Nursing: An Altruistic and Intellectual Profession

Barbara Summers and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

Dr. Summers talks about her family and her mother’s influence as a role model. She sketches her educational background and her path to her first job in nursing.

Dr. Summers explains that nursing attracted her because it is an interactive profession where the nurse positively influences the experience of another human being. She also underscores that nursing is intellectually rigorous and demands critical thinking skills and the ability to pull together data.

She next traces her path to college (George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia, BSN, 1978). She talks about working as a nurse throughout her program and the mentoring she received from the nurses at her job.
Chapter 10: The NIH and an Opportunity to Support Research Nurses

Barbara Summers PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this Chapter, Dr. Summers explains that she was recruited for NIH Clinical Services to develop cancer nursing research programs for research nurses. Dr. Summers explains Jean Watson’s care theory in greater detail and talks about its connections with transformational leadership. She then goes on to talk about her role at the NCI (where she arrived “knowing zip”): she developed a program to support research nurses proposing their own research projects.

Dr. Summers gives an example of a project proposed by a nurse on drawing blood. This demonstrates how a nurse brings a unique perspective to care situations and the issues/questions they raise can be quantified to improve care for all patients.

Dr. Summers next observes that she was a member of the Institutional Review Board at the NIH and learned a great deal about clinical research.
Chapter 11: An Opportunity to Work at a World-Class Institution

Barbara Summers PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this Chapter, Dr. Summers explains that after her experience at the NIH, she took a position in the Clinical Center which presented her with a whole new learning curve. At this point, a recruiter called her about a position at MD Anderson. She tells the story of her interaction with the recruiter and explains that she was interested as a new position would allow her to put her dissertation research into practice.
Chapter 2:The Theory and Advantages of Primary Nursing

Barbara Summers PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

Dr. Summers gives an overview of “primary nursing” and its development as a central concept in nursing. She also discusses its advantages for clinical practice and care of patients.
Chapter 3: A Focus on Primary Nursing

Barbara Summers PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

Dr. Summers observes that she started in nursing at a key point when primary nursing practice was also beginning, and she selected a hospital that focused in this new area, taking a job taking care of orthopedic surgery patients. She talks her job at a medical surgical ICU and the mentors who encouraged her to think about her career and future, particularly as a leader in nursing.
Chapter 4: A Master’s Program Leads to Oncology and to an Interest in Pain Management

Barbara Summers PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

Dr. Summers talks about the impact of her Master’s program on her nursing practice and her vision of her nursing career. She discusses her commitment to oncology nursing and providing “high intensity critical care” to patients and family members.

She sketches her work history and the impact of working in a chronic pain clinic (not related to oncology). She explains social attitudes toward pain and notes her own subspecialty interest in pain and pain management. She tells a story about successfully using multi-modality interventions to treat an oysterman who was very injured and couldn’t work.
Chapter 5: Thinking about Leadership and Nurses as Self-Care Agents

Barbara Summers PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this Chapter, Dr. Summers describes the impact on her career of her Masters program (MSN, 1981, Advanced Clinical Practice) and her specialization in Advanced Clinical Practice. She explains what that practice meant at the time and how her work in this area helped give her grounding for leadership roles.

Dr. Summers explains Dorothea Orem’s theory that the role of a nurse is to support a patient in his/her return to optimal heath so they can perform self-care. She stresses that nurses work as partners in a patient’s healthcare: Dr. Summers gives examples of how this works in practice.

Dr. Summers next talks about how she learned to think differently in her graduate program about self-care and also how she began to realize that she could have more of an impact on care as a leader. Dr. Summers describes her leadership style as “transformational” in that she serves as a role model and inspires people to be at their best.
Chapter 6: Learning the Complexities of Nursing Care

Barbara Summers PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

Dr. Summers talks about working at the Greater Southeast Community Hospital after receiving her Master’s. At this inner city hospital she focused on oncology and pain management and worked with great oncologists and physicians. She talks about the impact of working with patients in extreme poverty. She also recalls being nicknamed “LP” for Leader of the Pack –indication that her leadership impulse showed—and she started to see the impact she might have on nursing from a position of leadership.
Chapter 7: A ‘Hunger’ for Leadership; A View on the Independent Practice of Nursing

Barbara Summers PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

Dr. Summers begins this Chapter by giving credit to JoAnn Duffy, who taught her many leadership lessons. Dr. Summers talks about different kinds of power. She recalls her involvement in an innovative and eye-opening initiative undertaken at Greater Southeast Community Hospital: a collaborative practice established between nurses and physicians, a first step in recognizing that nurses are not mere “doctor helpers.”
Chapter 8: An Evolution of Leadership Experience

Barbara Summers PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

Dr. Summers recalls that she had a “hunger for exploring management” and jumped at the opportunity when a position opened in Hematology at Fairfax Hospital. Dr. Summers explains why she was hired and also recalls that she had to teach herself management as there were no books available at the time. She describes the many functions she had to learn and how they became fascinating problems for her.

Dr. Summers observes that she has a pattern of taking on positions that demand confidence and competence and she meets them with confidence and sometimes less competence going in than is comfortable for her. Dr. Summers talks about her pattern of taking on positions that demand confidence and competence.

Dr. Summers gives examples and talks about learning lessons about management people. She then talks about her promotion to the Director of Nursing, which gave her responsibility for many inpatient units as well as for managing leaders. She then talks about her principles for leading managers and leaders to perform at their best.

Dr. Summers says that her habit of moving to leadership positions without having all the skills for the job is an “illness.” (She says she identifies with an article she read on “The Imposter Syndrome.”) She is constantly driven to perform at higher levels and notes that she made her moves when wanted to do something different. She is good at identifying new opportunities, not at maintaining an institution’s status quo.
Chapter 9: A PhD Program and a Theory of Nursing and Leadership

Barbara Summers PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this Chapter, Dr. Summers notes that she was Director of the Department of Nursing at Inova Fairfax Hospitals for about a year when she felt she was losing her ability for sharp thinking. She decided to go back to school for her Ph.D (though she was still working; Ph.D. Health Care Administration, 1995). She talks about the struggle to get back in the habit of reading and synthesizing information. She also re-evaluated the stresses in her life and moved into a lower intensity job as a nurse educator while she was in her graduate program. Dr. Summers then talks about the ideas she encountered in this program: James Burn’s theory of transformational leadership and Jean Watson’s human caring theory. She saw crossovers between the two and ended up writing her dissertation on this subject.
Chapter 12: Joining an Institution that “Grabbed My Heart”

Barbara Summers PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

Here Dr. Summers explains how she joined MD Anderson. She recalls getting a call from a recruiter, but was not really paying attention until she heard the name, “MD Anderson,” and said, “Wait, can you repeat all of that?” Dr. Summers expresses how important it was to be offered an opportunity to work at this institution. She then describes the early interview and how she came to the decision to try for the position at MD Anderson.

Dr. Summers recalls coming to MD Anderson and standing for the first time in the lobby of the Clark Clinic. She describes how what she saw “grabbed my heard and it hasn’t let go of me.” She recalls sensing hope at the institution. She recalls her meetings with people and her sense that people came to work at MD Anderson specifically because of their commitment to the mission. She notes that even employees not directly related to research or patient care were somehow driven by a sense that they were contributing to the mission, and that “anyone can be instrumental” in forwarding that mission. Dr. Summers notes that even though sad events occur at MD Anderson, but it is a hopeful and joyful place with patients who have a great generosity of spirit.

Dr. Summers continues talking about her interview process and describes the scope of the role she was to take on as Director of Nursing as well as the four week transition period in which she finalized her work at the NIH and came to Houston.
Chapter 13: Roles as New Director of Nursing: Working with Growth in a Matrixed Organization

Barbara Summers PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

Dr. Summers begins with an overview of what she learned about leadership in her new role as Director of Nursing as she adjusted to the peculiarities of the institutional structure.

She talks about the institution’s organization in matrices, compares it to other institutions, nad notes that at MD Anderson “a lot of what we do seems to happen by magic.” She describes the challenges that arise from this structure at MD Anderson.

Dr. Summers next talks about the projects she worked on as the new Director of Nursing including the Mays Clinic and Alkek Hospital addition. She offers an example of how a MD Anderson decision-making proceeds and shares her leadership lessons.

She talks about the financial clarity that Dr. Leon Leach brought to the institution as the new Chief Financial Officer.

Dr. Summers also sketches how she developed a Professional Nursing Practice initiative. Dr. Summers says that she saw her role as providing the environment where nurses could excel.
Chapter 14: Associate Vice President for Clinical Programs: Challenges and Views on Communication

Barbara Summers PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this Chapter, Dr. Summers sketches her three-year role as Associate Vice President for Clinical Programs. She explains that the role intrigued her because it focused on high-level organizational issues. She talks about working with Physician-in-Chief, Dr. David Callendar and comments on the matrix organization of MD Anderson.

Dr. Summers next reflects on leadership and tells stories of leadership lessons she learned. She explains that MD Anderson is different from other organizations because of its clinical leaders. She also revisits the issue of the matrix structure in the organization, stressing that there is no infrastructure to engage physician leaders as well as the rank and file.

Dr. Summers recalls leadership feedback she received from Dr. David Callendar.
Chapter 15: Projects as Chief Nursing Officer: MD Anderson’s Magnet Designation; the Nursing Practice Congress; Primary Team Nursing

Barbara Summers PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

Dr. Summers talks about accepting the challenging position of Chief Nursing Officer. She notes that MD Anderson was in the process of preparing for its re-designation as a Magnet Institution (by the American Nurses’ Credentialing Center).

Dr. Summers explains why the Magnet designation is important to MD Anderson and describes how this designation supports the practice of transformational leadership. She explains that it connects to her role as Chief Nursing Officer and her goal of creating an environment in which nurses are in charge of decisions about practice.

Dr. Summers next talks about the Nursing Practice Congress and the model of Primary Team Nursing model she developed at MD Anderson. She explains how this involves scheduling nursing activities for an entire team and lists the benefits of this model for patients, the institution, and for team members.
Chapter 16: Challenges in Nursing Today: Building an Expert Workforce

Barbara Summers PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this Chapter, Dr. Summers lists challenges she must address as Chief Nursing Officer. First she explains how she had addressed the lack of leadership succession planning when she took on the CNO role. Next she talks about establishing the “Launch into Nursing” program to provide orientation for newly graduated .

Next Dr. Summers talks about the current nursing shortage and the challenge this presents to building a qualified and expert workforce for the future. Dr. Summers describes her job as creating an environment for nursing practice that will attract the best and the brightest and also retain senior women. She also explains efforts underway to ensure that nurses perform at the top of their license.

At the end of this session, Dr. Summers speaks about the future of nursing.
Chapter 17: An Absence of Women in Executive Leadership at MD Anderson

Barbara Summers PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this chapter, Dr. Summers observes that since her arrival at MD Anderson, there has been little progress in promoting women and minorities above the level of vice president: executive leadership continues to be white and male. She explains that the impediment seems to be a lack of self-awareness, and offers some examples of interactions that show how senior leadership does not see a problem. She observes that there is a similar problem in promoting women faculty and notes Dr. Elizabeth Travis’ work (Women Faculty Programs [Oral History Interview]) to advocate for women. Dr. Summers explains why the absence of women in leadership limits MD Anderson’s success. She also notes that, in other cancer centers, women serve as senior executives and MD Anderson is an anomaly, even among Houston institutions.
Chapter 18: The Division of Nursing: An Overview, the Professional Practice Model, and the Development of Nursing as an Autonomous Field

Barbara Summers PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

Dr. Summers describes the organization of the Division of Nursing and major projects undertaken since she assumed leadership in 2003 to ensure that all membered are appropriately licensed and credentialed and that they are always developing nursing practice.

Next she speaks in detail about the Professional Practice Model refering to the “quality care model” depicted in an image produced for the Division. (See transcript for image used during this discussion.) She talks about elements of primary team nursing; self-awareness; professional partnerships; and professional recognition.

Dr. Summers also explains what “achieving autonomy” means for professional nursing and why it is so important to the development of the field. She sketches some of the history of nursing.

Dr. Summers goes on to explain how a team at MD Anderson created the model, revising a practice model in place when she took over the Division. She unique working environment for nurses at MD Anderson and sketches the varied areas in which they function.
Chapter 19: A History of Nursing at MD Anderson

Barbara Summers PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this Chapter, Dr. Summers sketches the history of nursing at MD Anderson, beginning with the work of Renilda Hilkemeyer (interviewed for OHP). She discusses the contributions of former Nursing directors Joyce Alt and John Crosley, who led MD Anderson to its first Magnet designation.
Chapter 20: Activities as Chief Nursing Officer; Creating a New Academic Department of Nursing; The Future of Nursing at MD Anderson

Barbara Summers PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

Dr. Summers talks about her activities as Chief Nursing Officer (CNO) and Chair of the Department of Nursing, and offers her views on the futures of the Department and Division of Nursing.

She first talks about her appointment to the position of CNO in 2003 and sketches her main activities to develop patient care, the Professional Practice Model, the Clinical Nurse Advancement Program and the Nursing Practice Congress. She ensured that MD Anderson has Ph.D..

Next Dr. Summers explains a legacy she feels she is building faculty hires in a new Department of Nursing to create an academic Department of Nursing equivalent in status to other departments. She observes that the creation of the Department of Nursing was not controversial. She offers her views on the future of the Department of Nursing.
Chapter 21: Promoting “Top of License” Nursing Practice; the Future of Nursing at MD Anderson

Barbara Summers PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this Chapter, Dr. Summers talks about the future of the Division of Nursing. She explains the importance of ensuring that nurses are practicing at the “top of license,” noting that in the future nurses will work as coordinators of care. She explains some of the resistance she anticipates from stakeholders and nurses as the role of nurses changes and they are not available to perform roles (that are not “top of license”) currently expected of them. She notes that this change in nurses’ roles will transform MD Anderson Culture;.
Chapter 22 New Healthcare Delivery System; Nurses and Work with Patients and Families; the Future of Nursing

Barbara Summers PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

Dr. Summers offers her views on how changes in the healthcare delivery system are affecting the institution and influencing changes in the practice of nursing.

She first sketches the financial pressures and “mindboggling” challenges of the current healthcare environment.

Dr. Summers goes on to describe the ways that nurses are uniquely positioned to attend to patients and families because of their education and roles in care.

[the recorder is paused briefly]

She then describes the institution-level Patient and Family Experience Executive Committee and notes ways she had already been addressing family issues.

Dr. Summers explains how she is addressing value-based care by focusing on clinical teams.

Dr. Summers next talks about the next steps for the field of nursing.

Dr. Summers concludes with words about how she would like to be remembered.
Chapter 01: A Veterinarian Father Involved in the New Field of Laboratory Animal Medicine

Peggy T. Tinkey DVM and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this chapter, Dr. Tinkey talks about her family and experiences growing up in an agricultural area of Illinois with a veterinarian father. In particular, she tells the story of how her father came to be a community veterinarian and then, as a result of the Vietnam War, spend twenty years in the Air Force, working in the relatively new field of Laboratory Animal Medicine conducting animal research for the space program.
Chapter 02: An Interest in Living Medicine

Peggy T. Tinkey DVM and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this chapter, Dr. Tinkey sketches her early educational experiences. She notes that her family didn’t have a lot of animals. However, she had an affinity for science from an early age and notes that she thought in terms of “living medicine” with ideas of going to medical or veterinary school. She explains that she had many women classmates in veterinary school due to the state-wide need for vets and it was easier for women to work with large animals, given the availability of injectable drugs.
Chapter 03: Faith Shapes a Feeling for Animals; Work that Contributes to Human and Animal Health

Peggy T. Tinkey DVM and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this chapter, Dr. Tinkey talks about her the connection between her religious beliefs and the approach she takes to working with animals.

She begins by noting that she was educated in catholic schools, where she had a very good experience. She now attends a Baptist church and she explains some of the elements of her deep sense of faith. She explains that her feeling that “you’re here for a reason bigger than you” greatly influences her work. She explains that she has a deep respect for life and a commitment to benefit the welfare of animals, though she also has a strong conviction that there is a difference between humans and animals.

Next Dr. Tinkey explains that working with animals in a research setting can be “emotionally tough” for veterinarians, given the experimental procedures a veterinarian must conduct. She talks about how she copes with this and sees her role as making an animal’s life as good as possible. Referring to the Department of Veterinary Medicine and Surgery, she says, “That’s what we do here.” Dr. Tinkey states that working in veterinary medicine at MD Anderson is her way of contributing to both animal and human health.
Chapter 04: Speeding Through to Private Practice

Peggy T. Tinkey DVM and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

Dr. Tinkey observes that if she were able to repeat her high school and college experiences, she would “slow down.” She notes that she worked very hard in college, taken heavy course loads and winning an acceptance to veterinary school during her sophomore year. She also married and divorced, which influenced her decision to join the Mission Bend Animal Clinic (’83 – ’89), a pet animal practice, as she was a single mother.

Dr. Tinkey sketches the lessons she learned in private practice then briefly notes that she opened her own practice in 1984.
Chapter 05: Opening a Practice and Steps into Academic Medicine

Peggy T. Tinkey DVM and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this chapter, Dr. Tinkey explains how she came to open her own veterinary practice, the Prestonwood Animal Clinic, and the lessons she learned.

She also discusses how she began to consider how there might be more she could do with a veterinary degree, leading her to take a year out for a pathology fellowship at the Baylor College of Medicine (’87 – ’88). She explains how the fellowship came about through a “cold call” to Fran Doppel, who created a position for her as Clinical Veterinarian in the research animal area. Dr. Tinkey explains the importance of specialty certification for a professional working this area and why it was not possible to obtain at that time in her life.
Chapter 06: A Chance Opportunity to Work at MD Anderson and Earn Specialty Certification

Peggy T. Tinkey DVM and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this chapter, Dr. Tinkey explains how a client who brought a monkey into the veterinary clinic led her to call Ken Gray at MD Anderson. Dr. Gray later contacted her to talk about a job opportunity. She explains what attracted her to take a job with MD Anderson in ’93.

She next explains that Dr. Kim Vargas had been named chair of the Department of Veterinary Medicine and Surgery the year before. Tinkey explains her role –to help with a study that Dr. Kian Ang was conducting on 100 rhesus monkeys.

She also talks about looking for opportunities to publish and sketches the requirements she had to meet for board certification. She explains that Dr. Gray provided her with protected time to study for the certification exams.
Chapter 07: Departmental Roles and Strengthening Veterinary Care for Animal Colonies

Peggy T. Tinkey DVM and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this chapter, Dr. Tinkey explains the administrative organization of various sections within the department and the roles she served to build the department during the nineties. She begins by explaining that Dr. Kim Vargas had organized the department in sections and assigned her to lead the Section of Laboratory Animal Medicine, which required an understanding of catheterization and a focus on herd health. She also notes that she was tracked to take over as Department Chair.

Dr. Tinkey explains how the Department needed to change in focus to serve the research needs at MD Anderson, developing more regulatory medicine and a focus on colony health surveillance and biosecurity. She says she needed to embark on a “crash course on rodent biology and diseases” and realized that the department didn’t offer the same kind of medicine for rodents/mice as it did for large animals. She notes in particular that the department did not offer a surgical training program for investigators working with mice. She explains that, in part, this had to do with the perceptions that PIs brought to their work with mice as experimental animals and the role they expected veterinarians to play in studies. Dr. Tinkey explains that veterinarians are much better integrated into research teams now than they were in the nineties.

At the end of the interview session she explains that pain management for rodents is one of the most ignored areas in research animal medicine. She explains assumptions that researchers make about animal pain and how pain can influence research results. She notes that at MD Anderson now, every animal that received survival surgery also gets pain medication.
Chapter 08: A Brief History of Animal Medicine at MD Anderson

Peggy T. Tinkey DVM and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this chapter, Dr. Tinkey sketches the history of animal medicine at MD Anderson. She explains that the first president, R. Lee Clark, saw the value of having a veterinarian on staff and hired the first vet, Dr. John Jardine, in the sixties or seventies before a department of veterinary medicine had been established. She says she believes the department was founded in the seventies, with Dr. Cliff Stevens hired as the first pathologist.

Now, she notes, there are two veterinary departments as well as the primate center at the Michale E. Keeling Center for Comparative Medicine and Research. She explains that it was unusual for a cancer hospital to have a chimpanzee research colony and that this took vision. Dr. Tinkey sketches administrative reorganizations in veterinary medicine.
Chapter 09: The Importance of Departmental Accreditation and a Snapshot of Veterinary Medicine at MD Anderson

Peggy T. Tinkey DVM and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this chapter, Dr. Tinkey talks about the importance of accreditation in keeping MD Anderson research abreast of advances in the field of animal medicine. She draws a comparison with hospital accreditation and sketches the origin of the peer review system with AAALAC [Association for Assessment and Accreditation of Laboratory Animal Care], founded in 1965. She notes that MD Anderson was the 183rd institution to be accredited, indication of early adoption of care methods.

Next Dr. Tinkey explains what is involved in the extensive review process, providing a snapshot of the issues of concern to her, as Chair of the Department of Veterinary Medicine and Surgery. She notes that accreditation is part of department culture now and keeps the department constantly changing and improving.
Chapter 10: Preparing to Take on Leadership of the Department

Peggy T. Tinkey DVM and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

Dr. Tinkey explains that the growth of the department has been connected with Dr. Kenneth Gray’s vision and his role in mentoring her to take over as department chair. She talks about the areas of skill that leadership has required, noting the assertive temperaments of veterinarians at MD Anderson.

She talks about the value of the Faculty Leadership Academy and the challenges this training has enabled her to meet.

Next, Dr. Tinkey mentions changes she instituted once Kenneth Gray retired. Specifically, she expanded the approaches taken to large animal care into the area of rodent care: she hired four additional veterinarians and reorganized the department (in 2006) to create a Section of Compliance and Rodent Clinical Care.
Chapter 11: Taking on the Chair Position and Building Veterinary Medicine and Surgery

Peggy T. Tinkey DVM and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this chapter, Dr. Tinkey talks about several changes she brought to the department once she took over as chair.

She begins by explaining that from 2006 – 2006 she was serving as chief of the Section of Experimental Surgery and Imaging Support. She loved the job, she explains, and took on the chairmanship out of a sense of loyalty and duty to Dr. Gray.

She then provides an overview of the vision she brought to the role: having a centralized veterinary surgical service. She explains that research benefits when veterinarians are involved, bringing “surgical judgement” to animal research methods. She gives examples, discussing aseptic technique and leg amputations, noting that the latter creates chronic pain which, left untreated, can alter research results.

Next, she talks about changing departmental culture so that faculty and staff are all interested in “electronicizing” whenever possible (her term), i.e. always exploring how technology can help them perform better. She gives several examples: capturing information for datamining to evaluate workflow; using an iPhone to trouble shoot after-hours problems with animals; using a 3D printer to create a device to anaesthetize baby rats; creating an electronic medical records system for rodents.

She explains the importance of the EMR for rodents –an in-house written program (later replaced with a commercial version). This allowed for individual health care for valuable rodents. (Mice can cost $150 each.)
Chapter 12:The Impact of Successful and Unsuccessful Research Studies

Peggy T. Tinkey DVM and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this chapter, Dr. Tinkey talks about the impact two research studies, one successful and one unsuccessful.

She first discusses Kian Ang’s radiobiology study that she participated in when she was first hired. She explains that the study was designed to determine of the maximum dosage for radiation delivered to the spinal cord was valid. Dr. Ang determined that it was not, allowing for higher doses and new lifesaving procedures for patients. Dr. Tinkey talks about her role on this study as clinical veterinarian and explains that this result has an impact on her commitment to animal research.

Next, she talks about a plastic surgeon’s attempts to test an artificial trachea in dogs. This study failed because a proper biomaterial was not available. She explains that the failure of the tracheas created serious post-surgical complication in the dogs, forcing the PI to abandon the study. She also notes that the complications were very upsetting: one technician wanted to bring in IACOOC and a controversy broke out in the department over the value of this kind of experimentation. She talks about the value of having conversations about the humanity of animal research.
Chapter 13: Building the Rodent Population and An Overview of MD Anderson’s Genetically Engineered Mice

Peggy T. Tinkey DVM and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this chapter, Dr. Tinkey sketches the growth of the rodent facilities administered by the Department of Veterinary Medicine and Surgery and describes the genetically engineered rodents that many MD Anderson researchers use. Rodent facilities have grown in tandem with the growth of MD Anderson research.

She notes that the first significant expansion occurred in 2006 when the rodent facility was moved from its old location in the Jones Freeman Building to the new location in the Mitchell Research Building [BSRB]. Dr. Tinkey describes the “state of the art” caging systems that the Department invested in in order to reduce labor costs. She explains that the Department aims include identifying space to grow, sustaining the growth rate and achieving workforce efficiency. To demonstrate adherence to these aims, she talks about the roboticized cage washing system that has helped the Department maintain efficiency and control costs as the number of rodent cages has increased by twenty-five thousand between 2006 and 2016. She next sketches additional increases and some administrative changes in handling the rodent population. She notes that the Department is beginning a renovation to add another 8500 rodent cages.

Next, she talks about the genetically engineered mice that are important to MD Anderson research. She explains that “humanized mice” are “little avatars that grow a human tumor to generate a PDX or patient derived xenograft. She goes on to describe immune-deficient mice and nude mice, the latter being a “huge foundation” of cancer research that require a sterile environment with consequent special handling. She notes that the institution has invested over a billion dollars in animals for research, including genetically engineered mice that have been developed at MD Anderson.

Dr. Tinkey next talks about the Department’s emergency plans instituted to protect this investment. She recalls being at Baylor and the loss of thirty thousand animals during Tropical Storm Alison. MD Anderson keep animals in basements and protects animals with flood mitigation plans and on-call staff 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. She discusses the link between the Department’s Veterinary Emergency Plan and the institution’s Emergency Plan, noting the Department instituted a disaster plan as part of the accreditation process. She explains that MD Anderson’s plan is “very mature.”
Chapter 14: Thanks to Mentors, Family, Colleagues

Peggy T. Tinkey DVM and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this chapter, Dr. Tinkey thanks people who have had an impact on her career, including her parents, her husband and children, several mentors, colleagues, and members of faculty, and staff in her department. She tells a story to demonstrate the dedication and passion of her faculty and staff.
Chapter 15 An Exemplary Animal Care Program; Why Animals Are “Unsung Heroes”

Peggy T. Tinkey DVM and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

Dr. Tinkey begins this chapter by outlining what has been accomplished in the Department of Animal Medicine and Surgery under her leadership. She notes that the department was recently given a “glowing external review” and was called “an exemplary care program,” indicating that “we have done a lot of things right.” She says she is most proud of the fact that the department is a “high-functioning team,” despite the fact that veterinarians are passionate, opinionated people who frequently disagree.

Next, to give context for her discussion of why animals are key for cancer research, Dr. Tinkey recalls going to a lecture where she learned that the imperative for modern animal research came from the Nuremberg Trials and discussions of war crimes including experimentation on human beings. Dr. Tinkey concludes that animal use is a “humanitarian principle.”

Next, she talks about the need to use many different species of animals for research. She notes that animals are “powerful research tools” in service of work that will benefit patients. However, she asserts, “they aren’t little test tubes. They are sentient beings.” This sentiment, she says, brings humanity into the research process. She talks about why animals are the “unsung heroes” of research and how they are deserving of respect throughout the research process.
Chapter 16: The Gulf Coast Consortium Postdoctoral Laboratory Animal Medicine Residency Program

Peggy T. Tinkey DVM and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this chapter, Dr. Tinkey explains her role in creating the Gulf Coast Consortium Postdoctoral Laboratory Animal Medicine Residency Program, part of the Department’s education mission. She notes that former chair, Dr. Ken Grey, always has a fellowship position he usually awarded to a veterinarian in private practice who was exploring other careers. When she took over the chairmanship, there were 25 – 30 veterinarians at the Texas Medical Center and she had the idea to link these professionals and institutions to create a training program. Dr. Suzanne Craig, she notes, was responsible for setting the program in place and launching it in 2006. She talks about the numbers of fellows involved and where they have found positions after leaving.
Chapter 17: Behind the Driven Professional: A Creative, Funny Personality

Peggy T. Tinkey DVM and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this chapter, Dr. Tinkey provides a glimpse behind the professional persona. She notes that she is very focused and driven at work and that’s how colleagues know her. However she is a fun-loving jokester outside of work and enjoys many creative activities. She confirms that her creative side comes out at work, first in the poetry she writes for department celebrations. She gives an example by singing the parodic lyrics she wrote to the Soft Cell song, “Tainted Love.”

Next, Dr. Tinkey talks about her humor and creativity help her as an administrator (work that is not her first love).
Chapter 01: The Making Cancer History® Voices Oral History Project

Stephen Tomasovic PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this segment, Dr. Tomasovic provides an overview of the Historical Resources Center –which he founded-- and the Making Cancer History Voices Oral History Project that it oversees.
Chapter 02: Vietnam Trains an Administrator

Stephen Tomasovic PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this segment, Dr. Tomasovic talks sketches his educational background and describes the significance of his military service. Drafted as a college senior, his service in Military Intelligence during the Vietnam War not only gave him focus for his later graduate studies, but also strengthened specific characteristics and skills that would eventually suit him to a career in administration.
Chapter 03: Choosing Cancer Research

Stephen Tomasovic PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this segment, Dr. Tomasovic traces the evolution of his interests in graduate school, eventually leading him to focus on cancer research.
Chapter 04: Joining the Department of Tumor Biology at MD Anderson

Stephen Tomasovic PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this segment, Dr. Tomasovic talks about coming to MD Anderson in 1980 as an Assistant Professor in the Department of Tumor Biology (now Molecular and Cellular Biology). He explains that this was the period when Dr. Charles LeMaistre [Oral History Interview] and Dr. Frederick Becker [Oral History Interview] were bolstering the basic sciences. He explains how he re-evaluated his career, and shifted toward a focus on administration.
Chapter 05: The Cancer Biology Program

Stephen Tomasovic PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

Dr. Tomasovic begins this segment with comments on MD Anderson’s perceived weaknesses in basic research. He talks about the important role that graduate students serve in driving research at an institution and how they were integrated into departments at MD Anderson. He then describes his first “forays into leadership”: e.g. during 1986-’88 he created and directed the multi-disciplinary Program in Cancer Biology (first called Interdisciplinary Studies in Cancer Biology) in the Graduate School in Biomedical Sciences.
Chapter 06: Fostering Innovation and Multi-disciplinary Research

Stephen Tomasovic PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this segment, Dr. Tomasovic talks about how interdisciplinary work –at MD Anderson and in general-- is crucial to treating cancer and fostering creativity in research.
Chapter 07: Academic Affairs: Administrative Structure and the Role of the Vice President

Stephen Tomasovic PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this segment, Dr. Tomasovic provides an overview of the administrative structure of the Division of Academic Affairs and his responsibilities as Senior Vice President.
Chapter 08: An Ability to Work With and Within Structure

Stephen Tomasovic PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this segment, Dr. Tomasovic reflects on his leadership style and how this has facilitated his effectiveness. He notes how he came to the attention of James Bowen, then Vice President for Academic Affairs, who worked with him in creating the Faculty Senate (Dr. Tomasovic was the first Chair, ’91-93), and who appointed him Assistant to the Vice President for Academic Affairs (1994). The session closes with a sketch of the institutional flux in play during 1998 when Dr. Mendelsohn [Oral History Interview] assumed leadership of MD Anderson.
Chapter 09: The MD Anderson Presidents: Continuity of Leadership

Stephen Tomasovic PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

Dr. Tomasovic begins this segment with the observation that MD Anderson is unusual because of the long tenure of its key leaders and administrators. He characterizes the three presidents and gives examples of how the institution successfully met the managed care crisis. He notes that the institution has faced strong, external financial challenges at the transitions between Dr. LeMaistre and Dr. Mendelsohn and Dr. Mendelsohn and Dr. DePinho.
Chapter 10: A Lesson About Leadership and an Institutional Blind Spot

Stephen Tomasovic PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this chapter, Dr. Tomasovic shares a story that taught him lessons about leadership.
Chapter 11: Institutional Reorganization and Becoming Vice President of Academic Affairs

Stephen Tomasovic PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

Dr. Tomasovic begins this segment by sketching the administrative restructuring that occurred when Dr. John Mendelsohn arrived as institution president. He also described Dr. Margaret Kripke's [Oral History Interview] plans for restructuring Academic Affairs' and his role in this process. Dr. Tomasovic notes that Dr. Kripke expected him to iron out a range of difficulties arising among faculty.
Chapter 12: The Education Council, Sister Institutions, and Views On Leading Faculty

Stephen Tomasovic PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this segment, Dr. Tomasovic gives numerous examples of how he has built educational culture at MD Anderson through, for the formation of The Education Council (2001), strengthening faculty development initiatives, serving as Vice President of Extramural Programs (to become Global Academic Programs).
Chapter 13: The Faculty Senate and a Vision of Faculty Influence

Stephen Tomasovic PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

Dr. Tomasovic begins this chapter by sketching the history of the Faculty Senate. He discusses term-tenure then expands on the idea that the Faculty Senate was part of a larger vision of building faculty control over the governance of the institution. Dr. Tomasovic also explains how he came to found the Faculty Leadership Academy (1991), devoted to nurturing leadership qualities of faculty.
Chapter 14: A Mark Left on Education and Faculty Achievement

Stephen Tomasovic PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

This interview takes place a few weeks before Dr. Tomasovic’s retirement. Dr. Tomasovic closes the session with comments on his hopes that MD Anderson preserves its educational mission, which distinguishes it from other care-delivery institutions. He also hopes that his efforts to foster leadership among the faculty will endure.
Chapter 15: Serving as Special Assistant to Dr. Oliver Bogler

Stephen Tomasovic PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this segment, Dr. Tomasovic talks about his role as Special Assistant to the Provost. Dr. Tomasovic begins by describing the transition-support role he will serve in the coming year, assisting Dr. Oliver Bogler, who took over Dr. Tomasovic’s position as Senior Vice President of Academic Affairs. He discusses how he and Dr. Bogler are finding ways to link activities in Academic Affairs to the mission of the new MD Anderson president, Dr. Ronald DePinho. He gives examples of how he and Dr. Bogler are streamlining the bureaucracy of Academic Affairs to help faculty and graduate students as well as supporting Dr. DePinho’s mission.
Chapter 16: Changing Institutional Focus Under a New President

Stephen Tomasovic PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

Dr. Tomasovic begins this segment by comparing the leadership styles of John Mendelsohn [Oral History Interview] and Dr. DePinho, whose charisma, decisiveness and vision are reminiscent, he feels, of R. Lee Clark. Dr. Tomasovic talks about the impact of Dr. DePihno’s “Town Hall” session on 7 November 2011, when he announced that MD Anderson will now take a Moon Shot approach to curing cancer, focusing on five specific cancers (not yet announced). Dr. Tomasovic speculates on the cultural shifts this focused mission will create, influencing the commitment to global oncology, and educational programs.
Chapter 17: Academic Programs under a New President

Stephen Tomasovic PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this segment, Dr. Tomasovic notes Dr. DePinho’s commitment to graduate education and research. He describes the many discussions currently taking place in Academic Affairs to insure that all activities are in line with the new directions the institution is taking. He this segment with comments on his optimism that Dr. DePinho will steer the institution in positive directions.
Chapter 18: Travel, Photography, and a Story about Meerkats

Stephen Tomasovic PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this segment, Dr. Tomasovic talks about his retirement, noting that he has more energy now that he can spend more time taking care of himself. He talks about getting back into the photography and he has planned several of the eco-travel trips he and his wife enjoy, including a trip to India to see tigers. He tells an amusing anecdote connected to a photo snapped of him during his first trip to Africa: he is reclining in a meerkat colony, with meerkats perched on his hat and hip. He tells of sending that photo for use at the awards banquet when he was elected to the UT Academy of Health Science Education. Popping up amid the formal shots of other awardees, his photo caused a lot of reaction among the attendees. At the interview’s close, he returns to the subject of Dr. DePihno, noting that the focus on institutional growth caused MD Anderson to lose some of its connection to people –a key part of the culture that R. Lee Clark established. Dr. DePinho’s “common touch,” he believes, will help turn the culture of MD Anderson back to those roots. In this segment, Dr. Tomasovic also talks about the human side of R. Lee Clark.
Chapter 05: Gender Issues at MD Anderson and the Creation of Advocacy and Equity Services for Women

Elizabeth L. Travis PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

Dr. Travis explains how a movement to address women’s issues began in the eighties. The University of Texas System had convened a Commission on Women and Minorities. She also notes that Dr. Margaret Kripke, a major player in these events, came to MD Anderson in 1983. Dr. Kripke put together a small, ad hoc group to work on the status of women at MD Anderson. Included were: Elizabeth Travis, Lillian Fuller, and Judy Watson (Dr. Charles LeMaistre’s “right hand”). They conducted a study (1984) and found inequities: unequal pay for women; women took longer to be promoted, women were not serving on committees or as department chairs or in high-profile positions. Dr. Kripke took the data to Dr. LeMaistre and the Vice President of Research, Dr. Frederick Becker. She notes that women themselves were generally not aware of the inequities prior to the report. Next, the ad hoc group started the Women Faculty Organization to work for access to opportunities for women. She explains why it was important that senior women comprised the core groups. She also reflects on how the activities of the group were received.

Dr. Travis next talks about the rationale for putting together the book, Legends and Legacies, one of the first projects of the Office of Women Faculty Programs.

Dr. Travis tells a story about a table in the dining room of the Clark Clinic where men always ate their lunch. She recalls a day when the women involved in the Women Faculty Organization reserved it, much to the men’s shock. She talks about how humor was important as she and others worked for visibility for women. She tells how the “dining table” incident developed and showed a shift in the culture.

Next, Dr. Travis explains how the Office of Women Faculty Programs operates, stressing that women alone cannot make these changes to culture, the men in the institution must also be engaged. She talks about some measures of success: e.g. in 2007, nine out of the eleven faculty receiving faculty achievement awards were women. She goes on to talk more about the evolution of the early movement to address gender issues, when the faculty group was expanded to include women on the administrative side, as changes were not happening fast enough. In 1996, Dr. Travis observes, another survey was conducted about women in leadership confirming few women in high positions. At that point, Dr. Travis notes, Dr. Margaret Kripke was Chief Academic Officer and was in a position to correct inequities and identify rising-star women. Dr. Kripke was also on the point of retiring and concerned that she would leave a vacuum at the leadership table. (She was the first and only woman to date to sit on the President’s executive committee.) Dr. Travis explains that Dr. Kripke hired consultants (Wanda Wallace and one other consultant) to suggest plans of action. The idea for a dedicated office addressing women’s issues was formed. Dr. Travis applied for the position (and she explains why she decided to slow down her research career at this point), as she had always been passionate about gender issues.
Chapter 06: The Office of Women Faculty Programs: Activities and Challenges

Elizabeth L. Travis PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this Chapter, Dr. Travis describes some of the main projects developed through the Office of Women Faculty Programs (which opened in 2007). She begins by describing the book, Legends and Legacies (published 2008), that brought together personal narratives written by MD Anderson’s key women scientists and clinicians. She notes that she worked with Mary Jane Schier, Steve Stuyck, and Maria Dungler in the Public Affairs Office. She also explains the rationale behind the photograph best associated with the book: a group photo of the featured women dressed in cocktail dresses. She notes that it was inspired by an Annie Liebowitz photograph, but also notes that the group photo stresses that “We have to build communities of women.” She describes the book launch events and the impact of the book on the institution, noting that the book put a different and more human face on the women of the organization.

Next Dr. Travis describes several early activities of Women Faculty programs, including the website and its monthly online feature, “Women Leading the Way.” She also describes setting up the Kripke Legend Award to honor people who promote and women: it is a highly competitive in cancer medicine and is awarded to women and to men.

Next Dr. Travis describes reactions to the Office’s activities: “Male colleagues were not happy,” and Dr. Travis explains that she was described as “too strident.” There are still naysayers, she observes. Next she describes how she learned to address complaints after a particularly difficult set of personal attacks. She went to Dan Fontaine in the UT System for advice. He said, “Do a survey of Division and Department heads about Women Faculty Programs.” She explains the results and discusses how important it was that she reported the results at the Research Council and Clinical Council –transparency that did a great deal to change the tone of reactions to her work.

Dr. Travis explains that the Office of Women Faculty Programs is an independent office that reports directly to the Provost.

Dr. Travis stresses that the focus of the Office of Women Faculty Programs is to promote women into leadership positions. She explains that women leaders bring a different perspective and different problem-solving strategies to institutions when they are in leadership roles.

Dr. Travis explains some of the changes in culture she has observed at MD Anderson: for example, men on search committees now will say, “There are no women.” Dr. Travis then explains that many people resist thinking about gender as an issue because they feel they are being accused of not being fair-minded. At the end of this session, she talks about how she handles this and how the institution has changed.
Chapter 1: A Passion for Science Leads to Radiation Physics

Elizabeth L. Travis PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this Chapter, Dr. Travis talks about her family background and the educational track that led her to a career in radiation physics. She explains that she is a second generation Italian-American raised in the small town of Wilmerding, Pennsylvania. Her family owned a bar/restaurant and she grew up working in there from an early age, developing her work ethic in the process. Though her parents had only finished high school, both insisted that their children go to college.

Dr. Travis notes that she knew very early that she was interested in the sciences, but observes that ideas about careers for women at that time were very limited, and she thought of becoming a dancer or a flight attendant until tenth grade (at Westinghouse Memorial High School). At that point her biology teacher, Mr. Smith, had a great mentoring influence. She describes how Mr. Smith brought together all the science-focused students in her class into a community (where gender was not an issue). He helped her parents understand that she should go to college for the sciences, though she was encouraged to become a teacher at that point.

Dr. Travis attended Indiana University of Pennsylvania (B.S. 1965) and notes influences important during this period, including a course in radiation physics and an opportunity she took to work in a radiation physics laboratory at the University of Pittsburg during a summer. Dr. Travis explains her decision to go to graduate school for her Masters program. She mentions her marriage at the end of her first year in graduate school and how that influenced the path of her early career, taking her to South Carolina.

Dr. Travis talks about her involvement in training and the satisfaction she take in developing young minds. She shares her philosophy of mentoring: listening to identify where an individual needs help, offering constructive advice when needed.
Chapter 2: Choosing Opportunities to Develop a Research Career: A Growing Awareness of Gender Issues

Elizabeth L. Travis PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this Chapter, Dr. Travis explains that she was working as a Research Associate in the Department of Radiation Health, (1965−1967) Radiobiology Laboratories, Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA) when she realized that she missed the laboratory. She accepted a position that involved teaching and starting up a laboratory at the Department of Radiology at the Medical University of South Carolina (Charleston, SC, 1968−1971). >P>Dr. Travis recounts a story that she often tells women to demonstrate how women professionals often don’t believe in themselves. She explains that she was offered a position teaching and starting up a laboratory for the Department of Radiology at the Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, (1968−1971). She first turned the job down. “I had PhDs telling me I could do the job, but I didn’t believe it.” She immediately regretted the decision and called back the next day, taking on that challenge as well as the opportunity to work for her Ph.D. at the Medical University of South Carolina.

Next Dr. Travis talks about her evolving awareness of gender issues. She explains that she had always been aware of gender. She notes that she attended a very good high school (Westinghouse Memorial High School) where she felt that boys and girls were treated equally. She also notes family influences on her sense of equality. Dr. Travis then talks about how the sixties and limitations on women that are unimaginable now.

Dr. Travis also recounts an experience of sexism she had in the Department of Radiation Therapy at the Medical College of South Carolina. She had been hired to set up a laboratory, however when the head of the department hired a man to assist her, he offered this inexperienced new hire $4000.00 more in salary than Dr. Travis was paid “because he had a family and children.” Her salary was increased by $4000 (but no more). “We think it’s a meritocracy,” Dr. Travis says. “But it’s not true. You have to know how to promote yourself.”

Dr. Travis next tells about her decision to go overseas after completing her PhD. The University of South Carolina wanted her to stay, but she wanted to develop her research career and applied for post-doctoral programs, taking a position in London as a Research Scientist (lecturer) in the Department of Radiation Biology at the Mount Vernon Hospital Gray Laboratory (Northwood, Middlesex, United Kingdom, 1976−1979). Dr. Travis explains that the Gray Laboratory was a “Mecca” of radiation therapy and she was selected for their postdoctoral program because of her work on radiation and normal tissue.
Chapter 3: The Start of a Research Career on the Effects of Radiation on Normal Lung Tissue

Elizabeth L. Travis PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this Chapter, Dr. Travis explains how her research career really began between 1976−1979, when she was a Research Scientist/Lecturer at the Gray Laboratory (Mount Vernon Hospital, Northwood, Middlesex, United Kingdom). She notes that “they took a chance on her,” as she had never been awarded a grant, but they saw potential and recognized that she had knowledge of lung pathology and radiation therapy. This was key, as the field of radiation therapy was starting to focus on the effects of radiation on normal tissue. Dr. Travis lists the researchers who were at the Gray lab at that time. She talks about the atmosphere and notes some lessons in mentoring she received from the laboratory head, Jack Fowler.

Next, Dr. Travis describes a collaborative project she undertook to develop a non-invasive assay of lung tissue after irradiation that involved measuring the breathing rates of mice as they developed lung damage from radiation therapy. She describes the rationale of the study as well as the challenges of measuring the breathing rate of mice. She describes the device she and her colleagues developed to measure breathing rates (see Figure One) and notes that this was the first time that anyone had measured breathing rates as animals developed lung damage from radiation.

Next she notes that it was very hard to get the field to accept the findings and describes how she and her colleagues addressed this by arranging for their measurements to be confirmed. With that evidence gathered, their paper was published (1977/78). Dr. Travis next describes one regret: that she didn’t patent this device and another (described below): both have been picked up by companies and are still being sold thirty years later.

Next Dr. Travis describes the “jig” she developed to immobilize non-anaesthetized mice for irradiation (see Figure 2). This was developed to simulate how patients are irradiated in the clinic and Dr. Travis explains how they were working with fractionated doses.

Dr. Travis goes on to describe more of her work at the Gray Laboratory and why it was such an ideal environment. She talks about the goals she had set to achieve in London and notes that at the end of her three years there, she had an independent research career.
Chapter 4: Furthering a Research Career at MD Anderson

Elizabeth L. Travis PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

Dr. Travis begins this Chapter by explaining that she was aware of MD Anderson throughout her career. After her post-doctoral fellowship at the Gray Laboratory, she was recruited to serve as Cancer Expert at the National Institutes of Health (National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, 1979−1982) and she was recruited by Lester Peters for MD Anderson in 1982. Next Dr. Travis explains how her work on radiation damage to normal lung tissue in mice had implications for patient care. She describes some experiments conducted to explore radio-protectors, radio-sensitization, and strategies for changing the fractionation of beams to do less tissue damage. She undertook this work at MD Anderson and mentions individuals she worked with and the seminal data produced showing that it was better to use a lot of radiation on a small area of tissue to do the least damage to normal disuse.

Dr. Travis notes that she came to MD Anderson as an Associate Professor and she was the only woman in the Department of Experimental Radiation Oncology. She describes the department as very vibrant, one of the best in the field, and she brought her focus on normal tissue, which no one else was researching at the time. She also observes that the Department “took a chance” on her, as she had no grant funding at the time. However her first R01 grant proposal was funded; she also had a program project grant.

Dr. Travis describes how writing grant proposals helped her develop as a researcher during her first years at MD Anderson. She explains how a grant proposal creates a road map for an experiment and forces the researcher to articulate hypotheses and think about a research question in a holistic way. “You see it from 35,000 feet,” she says.

Dr. Travis compares her experience at MD Anderson with the environment at the NCI.
Chapter 09: Research and Grants Related to Gender and Diversity

Elizabeth L. Travis PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this Chapter Dr. Travis describes her grant supported work on gender and diversity projects. She begins by describing the “Gatekeepers and Gender Schemas” project (run through the Office of Women Faculty Programs) –a real-time study of recruitment in the sciences. She also describes her contributions to an NIH U54 Partnership Grant in which MD Anderson is partnering with the University of Puerto Rico to build a cancer research center, a cancer hospital, and to train physicians and researchers. Dr. Travis is a PI on that grant and on the training program. She describes why she enjoys working with students and also what is involved in the training program. The MD/PHD program, she says, is the “jewel in the crown” of the program and this summer its first two graduates will receive their degrees. She notes the commitment of the Puerto Rican students to return to their home country to practice.

[The recorder is paused briefly.]

Dr. Travis notes some differences in the way that gender issues play out in Puerto Rico and in the United Sttes, then describes how the project is administered. Next she observes that her interest in teaching, training, and developing young minds has worked underneath the surface of her career.
Chapter 10: Personal Choices and a Philosophy about the Importance of Having a Career and A Personal Life

Elizabeth L. Travis PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

Dr. Travis shares the name of her son, Scott Philips, whom she chose to have as a single parent. She goes on to talk about the issue of women, career and family, noting that she is tired of the question: “We aren’t over this yet.” She also says that it’s disturbing to her that this discussion usually focuses only on people with children. “Everyone deserves a personal life. We must provide people with time. Dr. Travis notes that her son is an “important legacy” for her to leave and she shares the advice she gives to women considering having children. She observes that the burden of child care still falls on women. Though more younger men are more involved, she still see vestiges of “old school” thinking even in younger men, citing what younger men say about women in leadership roles. Dr. Travis believes that the Office of Women Faculty Programs needs to develop a community of men discussing issues about life balance and personal life. She goes on to explain that careers in medicine and research demand obsession, obligation, and duty, but an individual must have down time to preserve resilience. She talks about her own interest in travel and the symphony and the pleasure she has taken in making friends around the world.
Chapter 11: Setting up the Office of Women Faculty Programs

Elizabeth L. Travis PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this Chapter, Dr. Travis describes how she went about setting up an office that could create rapid results for women at MD Anderson. She first hired a data person, because “it’s all about the data.” She explains data is fundamental to all of the Office’s work, decisions about priorities, and role in debunking myths. She describes how her skills in presenting issues and responding to naysayers evolved as she set up the office. Next she explains the elements of the Office’s mission: to increase the visibility of women within the institution and beyond and to have an impact on policy. As an example of the latter role, she describes how the Office was instrumental in changing the policy on tenure clock extension for faculty with a new child. She also talks about the Office’s role in getting people to look at their unconscious biases: she does a lot of teaching about this issue, using a test developed at Harvard University for unconscious bias. She also discusses mentoring. Faculty Development runs the institution’s formal mentoring programs, however Women Faculty Programs addresses issues that this program misses, such as why women don’t like to promote themselves and the skills they lack in self-promotion. She quotes Walt Whitman: “Ya done it, you’re not bragging.” She also talks about training she does for men to help them understand that they must ask women questions.

Next Dr. Travis talks about the concept of “sponsorship.” She has published a paper on sponsorship and defines it in contrast to mentoring, explaining that it’s a business model that she is adapting to a medical/scientific concept. She intends to put together a sponsorship workshop at MD Anderson and will also develop a Women’s Leadership Network spanning all fifteen units of the University of Texas System, further breaking down barriers between faculty and administrative women.

Dr. Travis speaks about one project she has not yet been able to push through: Cultural competency training focused on gender for Department chairs. She explains the need and notes that this is on the calendar for August 2014. She intends this as a pilot program to see how it works.

Dr. Travis talks about the issues that cultural competency training would cover and stresses that she sees her role as helping department chairs develop the best of the best.
Chapter 12: Leaving a Legacy of Visible Women

Elizabeth L. Travis PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

Dr. Travis talks about the legacy she feels she will leave at MD Anderson: more women in leadership roles and communities of women who feel visible and recognized. She is particularly gratified by the community building and gives an example of how the Office supports growth of community. She also feels she has had an impact on male colleagues who are now aware of gender issues. Dr. Travis shares some milestones she would like to see accomplished before she retires.

Dr. Travis says she has no immediate plans to retire. She is “having too much fun” and she has worked since she was twelve and would need to have an outlet for her energy. She talks about Dr. Margaret Kripke, who retired for a time, then took on another position.

Dr. Travis makes some final comments about MD Anderson, where “what we do is truly remarkable.”
Chapter 7: Women Faculty Programs: Its Beginnings; Awards for Progress Made

Elizabeth L. Travis PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this Chapter, Dr. Travis reviews the history leading to the formation of the ad hoc committee in the 80s tasked to evaluate the status of women and discusses some documents (not yet in the MD Anderson Archive) related to this history. She talks about the report produced by the Committee to Evaluate the Status of Women (1988/89). (She also has a copy of the report made to the institution by consultant Wanda Wallace, called in to advice how to address gender inequity.) She notes that MD Anderson has a better track record than most medical institutions in promoting women. She notes that MD Anderson received a Leadership Development Award in 2012 from the American Association of Medical Colleges: this recognized the body of work accomplished by the Office of Women Faculty Programs. Dr. Travis herself received this award as an individual in 2009. She outlines the accomplishments that have been made, among them an increase in women in leadership roles from 15% to 27%. Dr. Travis says this is a “model office” and that she speaks all over the country to talk about its structure and role.
Chapter 8: Leading Change for Women; Women as Leaders

Elizabeth L. Travis PhD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this Chapter, Dr. Travis discusses the importance of developing leadership skills for women. She opens with the statement that one cannot leave leadership to luck: an individual must be noticed, be visible and prepared for opportunities. She then lists her formal leadership training experiences summarizes data gathered about these programs by Dr. Shine Chung and others confirming that they make a difference in helping women advance into leadership roles. She notes that the Office of Women Faculty Programs has money to send a number of women and some minority men to leadership programs each year. Next, Dr. Travis explains how her leadership training expanded her own skill set. She talks about how the training at Rice University trained her to deal with conflict situations that arose in 2003, when she was Chair of the Faculty Senate. She again stresses that leadership training gives women tools to navigate complex institutions, to self-promote, and to not only know the leadership theory, but to implement ideas.

Dr. Travis next tells a story about a nasty incident that arose during a meeting when men verbally and personally attacked her. She speaks about how shocked she felt and how her training enabled her to handle the situation. She observes that scientists are very accustomed to handling criticism and even attack when it comes to their work and data. But the skill set for handling personal attacks is different.

Dr. Travis next stresses that women must be prepared for opportunities and they must actually take them and not believe that they are not qualified. Dr. Travis defines the “imposter syndrome” that plagues women and discusses the fact that men and women are still perceived differently and that there is a much narrower band of acceptable behaviors for women in professional situations.

Next Dr. Travis turns to the qualities that women bring to organizations when they serve in leadership positions. She talks about women’s instinctive listening and collaboration skills, resulting in a different leadership style. She explains why this is needed (noting that the Sandusky sexual abuse scandal at Penn. State would not have occurred had women been involved).

Dr. Travis explains that complex problems require different points of view coming together to find solutions and that women bring valuable perspectives to the table. She also cites the importance of women as role models and the fact that women patients and the great numbers of women who serve in caregiving roles can connect to women in leadership positions. She describes a survey of research articles placed in journals: articles with women in the list of authors tend to be placed in higher impact journals.
Chapter 01: A Large Eastern European Family, a Scholarship, and A Scientist’s View of Spirituality

David J. Tweardy MD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this chapter, Dr. Tweardy talks about his family and early education and sketches the roots of his own spiritual beliefs.

He begins by sketching the immigrant roots of his family in the area formerly known as Slovenia in Eastern Europe. He talks about the origin of his name and the pride of place he grew up with in Pennsylvania in his large family. He also discusses being raised as a Byzantine Catholic, and his own relationship with faith, which transformed over his life into a spiritual sense connected to science.

Next, Dr. Tweardy explains how he was able to get a scholarship from U.S. Steel, where his father was employed, to transfer to South Kent High School. This gave him access to a very good secondary education.

He explains that he and his six siblings formed three subgroups, with he and his brother Jim and sister Susan being the spiritual ones in the family. He explains the influence of his mother, who had great emotional intelligence and who taught him that instances of deprivation could be seen in a spiritual light.
Chapter 02 : A Focused Student Intent on Science Education

David J. Tweardy MD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this chapter, Dr. Tweardy talks describes himself as a student, noting that he was always “on the spectrum” of autism and Asperger’s Syndrome, with an extraordinary ability to concentrate and a strong visual imagination. He describes his “excitement about everything” in elementary school and how he explored scientific topics, deciding he would be an astronomer. He explains how he zeroed in on engineering, so that when he was admitted to Princeton University [AB conferred, 1974, Cum Laude, Chemistry] he majored in aerospace engineering.

Dr. Tweardy compares the cultures of South Kent High School and Princeton.
Chapter 03: An Inspirational Friend, Sports, and Spirituality

David J. Tweardy MD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this chapter, Dr. Tweardy makes connections between his practice in sports and his spiritual sensibility. He begins by talking about an influential friend he at Princeton, Louis Rinaldini, who convinced him to join the crew team. Dr. Tweardy then talks about lot about the experience of rowing crew, where in peak moments, the rower will reach a state of ecstasy. He describes the spiritual dimensions of this experience, shares an analogous experience in basketball, and makes the connection with his sense of spirituality and science.
Chapter 04: “Thinking Like an Electron” in College: From Engineering, to Chemistry, to Molecular Biology

David J. Tweardy MD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this chapter, Dr. Tweardy explains how he shifted from a major in aerospace engineering to chemistry, eventually making the decision to apply to medical school. He talks about academic challenges he faced in his first year at Princeton University, how he developed the mindset of an academician, and how he discovered, while taking organic chemistry, that he could “think like an electron.” As this was in the early days of biochemistry, he made the move into cell biology. Dr. Tweardy then explains how he began to think about medical school for his further education.
Chapter 05: Medical School Leads to a Research Focus on Cytokines

David J. Tweardy MD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

Dr. Tweardy begins this chapter by noting that he was always a physician-scientist, and he explains why he did several post-doctoral fellowships after medical school [MD, 1978, Harvard Medical School, Medicine] instead of doing a PhD program.

He explains that he approached medical school through the sciences and particularly enjoyed the coursework in the first two years, when he refined his interest in chemical structures and macromolecules: he began to focus exclusively on proteins and their interactions with small molecules. He was doing this work in the early days of cloning, which led to his work on cytokines.

Next, Dr. Tweardy reflects on a “wrenching experience” at Case Western Reserve [1980 Case Western Reserve, Intern/Resident], when a patient with AML died of sepsis. Dr. Tweardy then became interested in how to treat infection and have an impact on the underlying problem of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia by working with molecular mechanisms that “jumpstart the marrow.”

Dr. Tweardy then speaks about his discovery of the complexity of immunology [1982] during his fellowship in infectious diseases at the same institution. He explains mechanisms for influencing macrophage activation to address the immune system. Through his work with Jerry Ellner, he was able to conduct a study where he isolated monocytes from patients and show that they didn’t have as much HLAD on their surfaces. After incubating them, they grew and they believed they were producing macrophage activating factor. They wrote a letter to Genentech requesting [WHAT?], which enabled him to show a positive result on all the immunological XXX that would affect the white cells.
Chapter 06 :Cytokines and Cancer-Related Research at the University of Pittsburg (late Eighties)

David J. Tweardy MD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this chapter, Dr. Tweardy traces the evolution of his work from the early stage of purifying and cloning cytokines (see Chapter 05) through the discovery of the relationship between STATG and STAT3. He begins by noting his interest in participating in the groundbreaking work on cytokines because of the further discoveries it promised. He talks about his move from the Wistar Institute to the University of Pittsburg, occasioned because of his wife’s career (Ruth Falik, MD; married 21 January 1982), then discusses his work with a library of bacterial RNA to discover mechanisms for producing cytokines, shifting to studies of neutrophils.

Dr. Tweardy then explains that his work at the new cancer institute at the University of Pittsburg enabled him to shift his focus to cancer and leukemia. He explains leukemia creates abnormalities in GCFS [granulocyte colony-stimulating factor?] its molecular signaling. He explains how he collaborated with an ENT surgeon to discover mechanisms of the role STAT3 serves in squamous cell proliferation and later work on how to block its function. He discusses how this work contributed to differentiating the roles of STAT3 and STATG.
Chapter 07: Research and Administration at Baylor College of Medicine

David J. Tweardy MD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this chapter, Dr. Tweardy sketches the work he accomplished once he joined the Department of Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine (in 2006) and assumed roles as deputy chair, chair ad interim, and chair. He notes that at the University of Pittsburg he learned to love administration and sketches the reasons he found Baylor attractive: administrative opportunities, clinical practice, and research technology.

Next, Dr. Tweardy talks about developments in his research as he began to work on small molecule probes. He explains that he began to act on his desire to mentor the next generation of physician-scientists [via a K award]. He illustrates some leadership lessons with anecdotes and comments on the stressed financial climate at Baylor. He also describes his leadership style and proclivity for working with teams. He gives overview of what he gained working in administrative roles at Baylor College of Medicine and comparing the culture at Baylor to MD Anderson’s.
Chapter 08: A New Role as Division Head at MD Anderson

David J. Tweardy MD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

He gives an overview of how he stepped into his role as head of the Division of Internal Medicine (2014). He begins by explaining that Dr. John Mendelsohn [oral history interview] began to organize departments around onco-medicine, and this included recruiting a critical mass of specialists to manage the Division of Internal Medicine. He sketches changes in division leadership.

Dr. Tweardy then explains how became aware of the job, the appeal of the position, and the vision he had for division. He then talks about differences in the culture at Baylor College of Medicine. He sketches leadership lessons he learned in his interim chair roles that would serve him at MD Anderson.

Next, Dr. Tweardy talks about his good working relationship with Ethan Dmitrovsky, MD [oral history interview], the provost, and the overlap in their ideas for developing the division: building service excellence, growing research, and recalibrating expectations.

Dr. Tweardy then talks about the “excessive siloism” at MD Anderson, the hierarchies among divisions, and the challenges of establishing the value of the Division of Internal Medicine. He explains the steps he took to address the visibility and perception of the Division’s value, discussing in particular the steps taken to improve and showcase financial accountability.
Chapter 09: Stepping in to an Institution Undergoing Change

David J. Tweardy MD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this chapter, Dr. Tweardy begins to share his impressions of the period of turbulence MD Anderson was experiencing in 2012, 2013, after Ronald DePinho [oral history interview] became president. He begins by recalling what he heard about the institution while he was still at the Baylor College of Medicine and explains why he didn’t allow the stories to influence his view of MD Anderson. He talks about his respect for Dr. DePinho then explains how his view of the situation at MD Anderson shifted once he became division head and he saw problems with morale and other issues.

Next, Dr. Tweardy comments on the “three factors” that turned the situation around: Dr. Steven Hahn’s appointment as Chief Operating Officer; the impact of the Faculty Senate and the work of Julie Izzo, MD and Ann Killary, PhD; Marshall Hick’s [oral history interview] role as interim president and the shared governance model he helped institute. He also talks about the impact of the McChrystal Group and the creation of the ROPR system for tracking institutional performance and change.
Chapter 10: MD Anderson in Transition: Rebuilding and Integrating Relationships Before and After Dr. DePinho’s Resignation

David J. Tweardy MD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this chapter, Dr. Tweardy discusses the creation of the Committee of Division Heads and the Committee of (Department) Chairs, two bodies needed to build communication channels and strengthen faculty trust and engagement. He points out that the Committee of Division Heads recognized Dr. Marshall Hicks as the best person to serve as interim president after Dr. DePinho’s resignation. Dr. Tweardy talks about the impact of these committees during the reduction in force in 2015 and the implementation of Epic.

Next Dr. Tweardy talks about the role of Julie Izzo and Ann Killary in strengthening the impact of the Faculty Senate in restabilizing the institution: he notes that this added another layer of integration to the institution.

Dr. Tweardy then talks about the divisional issues he brought to the Committee of Division Heads. He explains how he saw his role. He also notes that he was struck by the “level of alarm” that the Faculty Senate expressed regarding the new governance structure that was evolving: he makes comparisons with the faculty senates at the colleges of medicine at Baylor and Pittsburg. He reflects on the communication channels that evolved and observes that new people were stepping into the role of communication broker.
Chapter 11: The McChrystal Group, the Rolling Operational Priorities (2015, and Observations on Strategic Planning

David J. Tweardy MD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this chapter, Dr. Tweardy sketches the institution’s work with the McChrystal Group to develop the “rolling operational priorities” to organize the stabilization efforts. He sketches the process of working with the McChrystal Group and the two major outcomes: a decision-making process leading to Shared Governance Committee approval and the organization of work groups that addressed different institutional issues (the ROPRs). Dr. Tweardy notes that he was in charge of the ROPR3, which focused on education. He describes how each work group’s activities were organized to identify priorities to address.

Next, Dr. Tweardy talks about the value of this system and notes that when the relationship with McChrystal ended, the institution was very functional in decision making. He explains that the ROPR system was built on the “pyramid” structure of strategic planning and, in turn, laid the foundation on which the current strategic planning process (under Peter Pisters, MD) is built.
Chapter 12: From Marshall Hicks, MD as Interim President to Peter Pisters, MD

David J. Tweardy MD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

[pause in recording]

Dr. Tweardy explains that the research community has been waiting to see evidence of Dr. Pister’s commitment to the research agenda, and his appointment of Guilio Draetta as Chief Scientific Officer has begun to address this challenge

Next, Dr. Tweardy comments on Dr. Pister’s slow and deliberate decision making style. He then comments on the tradition of long-tenured presidents at the institution.
Chapter 13: Emergency Medicine and the Hospitalist Service

David J. Tweardy MD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this chapter, Dr. Tweardy talks about a major initiative he undertook on becoming division head: building the institution’s emergency medicine readiness and hospitalist service. He begins by explaining that the medical management of acutely ill patients is a challenge and that when he arrived in 2014, the institution was not addressing this as effectively as it should be, even though the emergency center was established in 2012. Dr. Tweardy explains that he wanted to institution to deliver not only the best cancer care, but the best onco-medical care then talks about developing hospitalist and emergency services.

Next, Dr. Tweardy comments on the resistance to emergency services and instances of the institution’s conservative thinking about the treatment of acute patients. He observes that it can be helpful to have an outsider bring in a new perspective and a new way of organizing functions.
Chapter 14: Final Comments and What Might Be Next

David J. Tweardy MD and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this chapter, Dr. Tweardy talks about career paths for leaders, how his own has evolved, and what might be next though he has no immediate plans to leave the institution. He next talks about his plans for the Division: to stay aligned with the institution’s strategic plan and to address some issues in the internal leadership pipeline. He notes how his division has opportunities to grow through the MD Anderson Network.
Chapter 01: A Family that Modeled Service to Others

Louise Villejo and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

Ms. Villejo sketches her family background and early education at Catholic Schools and the grounding this gave her in faith and values. She explains that her mother, in particular, provided her with a model of service to others.
Chapter 02: College, Activism, and a First Taste of Leadership

Louise Villejo and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

Ms. Villejo explains her activist roles at the University of Houston where there was strong presence of the Women’s Movement, the Black Movement, and the Chicano Movement.

Ms. Villejo notes that she was interested in community empowerment and explains her work in the Chicano Movement, where she began to take a leadership role. She reflects on her impulse to speak her mind and the lessons about leadership she learned.
Chapter 03: Working with Community Health Centers

Louise Villejo and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

Ms. Villejo talks about her first job after college, working with the Rio Grande Federation of Health Care Centers. She explains the lessons she learned working with individuals with very limited access to health care. She also comments on what she learned from watching ineffective leaders.
Chapter 04: A Masters in Public Health and a Focus on Education

Louise Villejo and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

Ms. Villejo talks about her decision to return to school for her Masters in Public Health (1982, M.P.H. Health Administration, University of Texas Health Science Center, School of Public Health, San Antonio, TX). She describes her growing focus on education. She also notes the absence of formal mentors during her education and early career.

Ms. Villejo then talk about the impact of her National Cancer Institute Internship (1981-1982, University of Texas Health Science Center, School of Public Health), which allowed her to see educational programs developed at a national level. She also talks about the professional skills she learned in this training period.
Chapter 05: The Patient Education Office in the Early Eighties; An Innovative Philosophy of Patient Education

Louise Villejo and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

Ms. Villejo explains how, in 1982, she came to MD Anderson as a Health Education Specialist in the Office of Patient Education at MD Anderson. She then provides a portrait of the Office’s scope and approach to education at that time.

She explains the types of educational materials and how they were organized by treatment areas. She talks about how educational content was developed and explains the main goal of the educational materials –to involve the patient as a decision maker in his/her own treatment.

Ms. Villejo explains how her view of patient education was shaped by her mother’s experience with breast cancer in 1980.
Chapter 06: The Patient Education Office in the Eighties; Services Provided and Funding Challenges

Louise Villejo and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

Ms. Villejo notes in this Chapter that, at MD Anderson, “everyone is a patient educator.” She covers the process of integrating educational content from different sources. She also explains a major challenge: the Patient Education Office must secure its own funding for educational materials.
Chapter 07: Expanding the Patient Education Office: The Learning Centers

Louise Villejo and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

Ms. Villejo begins by talking about her promotion to Director of the Patient Education Office in 1986/87 and the reporting structure in which she worked at this time, when the Office was made part of the Public Affairs Office.

She then tells the story of creating the first Learning Center in 1987, a forerunner of patient and family centered care that is now the focus of the institution. She then explains how two more centers were created. She notes a few programs held at the Centers and also underscores that thirty thousand people per year use the Centers.
Chapter 08: The Patient Education Office: Raising Awareness of the Support Services Provided for Patients

Louise Villejo and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

Ms. Villejo talks about other activities of the Office: supporting development of the Place of Wellness, bringing in speakers, helping to plan the kitchen in the Mays Clinic.

She next explains that the Office must work constantly to raise awareness of the services and materials that are available for patients. She talks about a survey done of the Patient Education Program in 2000 and the Patient Orientation Class created as a result. She also talks about an overview of psychosocial services available and a 1990s assessment of educational materials. She notes that staff are unaware of many of the materials available for patients .
Chapter 09: Inspired by Family Members

Louise Villejo and Tacey A. Rosolowski PhD

In this Chapter, Ms. Villejo describes why her grandparents and parents served as inspirations and role models for her work ethic and personal values. She explains how these generations provided models of strong women and people who worked together and provided services to their communities. She recalls her father’s inspiring reaction to white flight from their neighborhood in the Third Ward of Houston when African American families began moving in. He refused to be part of that and decided to keep the family in the community.

Ms. Villejo recalls reactions to her gender and ethnicity and comments on her parents’ support for her ambitions. She tells a story about her father giving her a briefcase to take to grade school.

Search

Browse

Contribute to OpenWorks