View Document

Academic Promotions Policy

This is the current version of this document. To view future versions, click the link in the document's navigation bar.

Section 1 - Background and Purpose

(1) To inform prospective applicants and the Academic Promotions Committee of the policy and principles underlying the promotion process for academic staff members seeking promotion to Academic Levels B, C, D and E at La Trobe University.

Top of Page

Section 2 - Scope

(2) This Policy applies to all academic staff employed at La Trobe University whether full time or part time, fixed-term or continuing, who seek promotion to:

  1. Level B (Lecturer; Research Fellow);
  2. Level C (Senior Lecturer; Senior Research Fellow);
  3. Level D (Associate Professor; or Principal Research Fellow and Associate Professor); 
  4. Level E (Professor).

(3) This Policy does not apply to casual or sessional academic staff. 

(4) Applicants for promotion should normally have held a position at La Trobe for a minimum of two years prior to seeking promotion.

(5) Fixed-term staff are eligible for promotion. However, promotion, if granted, will not extend a fixed term of appointment.

Overview

(6) The University will recognise and reward sustained academic excellence through a transparent and consistent process of promotion. Promotion will be awarded on the basis of the quality and impact of contributions to the University’s goals in teaching and research.

(7) The evaluation will be based on evidence of performance in each of the three areas of:(1) teaching; (2) research and scholarly activity; and (3) leadership and engagement.

(8) Where an academic appointment specifically precludes or constrains contribution to one of these areas (for example, Scholarly Teaching Fellows and other teaching-focused positions may not have workload allocations for leadership and engagement activities), the application will be judged against the relevant areas of contribution.

(9) For the purposes of this Policy, research and scholarly activity includes:

  1. discovery and innovation, 
  2. creative works, 
  3. scholarship of teaching and learning, 
  4. scholarly integration or synthesis, and 
  5. knowledge transfer or application
  6. a proportion of supervision of higher degree by research students.

(10) Teaching and supervision includes: 

  1. preparation of teaching materials for face to face, online and other mode of delivery
  2. unit and course development, including online, off-campus and off-shore learning materials
  3. delivery of lectures, tutorials, laboratory classes, practicum and clinical education
  4. delivery of online learning
  5. delivery of off-campus, off-shore and distance education
  6. coordination of units and courses
  7. supervision of teaching staff, including casual and sessional staff
  8. supervision of honours year, postgraduate by coursework and a proportion of supervision higher degree research students
  9. supervision of undergraduate students undertaking research projects or fieldwork
  10. preparing and marking and/or moderation of student assessment 
  11. student consultation

(11) Leadership and engagement may include: 

  1. committee participation
  2. organising and/or attending meetings, forums, seminars etc
  3. consultancy
  4. community service
  5. industry liaison and grant funding application 
  6. leadership positions at Department, School, College, regional, University and/or research centre level
  7. management and administration
  8. internal and external professional work.

(12) In each of the three area relevant to the application, academic work should be informed by a critical reflection on existing knowledge and best practice. Achievement should be supported with three kinds of evidence: externally peer-reviewed outputs; documentation of appropriate preparation and professional development; feedback and evaluations from relevant people such as referees, students, supervisors or external partners. Each type of activity is valued, as is each type of evidence that is required.

(13) Applicants for promotion to Level E will be expected to provide evidence of excellence in research/scholarship and/or teaching and supervision that is recognised internationally. They will also be expected to provide evidence of leadership such as leadership in promoting research, developing research training, fostering excellence in teaching and encouraging academic staff development; and leadership in a discipline, program, School within the University and within the wider community.

(14) Applicants for promotion at all levels are encouraged to provide evidence of leadership, appropriate for that level, whether of a formal or informal kind, which enhances teaching and/or research at the University.

(15) The University will recognise and reward academics whose teaching and research is interdisciplinary or innovative in ways that may challenge existing disciplinary conventions. 

(16) The University will also recognise excellence and leadership in clinical or professional practice as part of the role of an academic in professional Schools/Departments/Colleges. 

Top of Page

Section 3 - Policy Statement

(17) Academic promotion at La Trobe University will be based on the following principles, as detailed in the academic promotions procedures and evidence matrices:

  1. Academic promotion criteria will be consistent with selection criteria, probationary review criteria and the University’s performance management framework.
  2. Academic staff will be appointed to the University on the basis of evidence that they have the potential to develop a successful and rewarding career at the University if they make sustained, excellent contributions as a teacher and/or a researcher, appropriate for their disciplinary field and as required by their particular School and College and the University’s strategic priorities.
  3. Expectations of academic staff at each level will be clearly articulated by the University, demonstrating the opportunities for long-term career development though the levels. These will include expectations about academic preparation and ongoing professional development; about externally peer-reviewed outputs; and about feedback or evaluations from students, colleagues, managers and external partners.
  4. Academic staff will be provided with opportunities for staff development to enable them to meet expectations of academic preparation for teaching, research, management and leadership according to level.
  5. Academic staff will be provided with appropriate advice and support in the preparation of applications for promotion, and will receive clear and timely feedback on the outcomes.
  6. The academic promotion process will assess applications on the evidence provided about the quality and impact of their contribution under each area.
  7. The academic promotion process will be based on demonstrated performance, relative to opportunity, and will actively encourage applications from under-represented groups.
  8. The Academic Promotions Committee will take a ‘whole of career’ approach when evaluating an application, taking into account the work that the staff member has been required to undertake by the University.
  9. Should the Academic Promotions Committee deem that an individual merits promotion, it will be the responsibility of the relevant academic unit to fund the additional salary costs attributed to promotion. This will also apply in the case of staff holding research only positions, whose salaries usually are provided by external funding bodies. 
  10. The University values the diversity in its academic workforce and encourages applications for promotion from all academic positions, regardless of workload allocation, provided that a minimum standard of achievement is reached in research and scholarly activity as appropriate to the academic’s appointment.
Top of Page

Section 4 - Procedure

Part A - Criteria for Promotion

(18) High levels of performance and achievement, appropriate to Level, disciplinary field, type of appointment and agreed work plan, and relative to opportunity, in the following three areas of academic work:

  1. teaching;
  2. research and scholarly activity; and
  3. leadership and engagement

(19) Unless the applicant’s current appointment or the nature of their role specifically precludes their involvement in one of the three areas.

  1. Meeting the threshold requirements for appointment at the Level to which they seek promotion (MSALs).

Part B - When to Apply for Promotion

(20) Academic staff members may apply for promotion at any time during the year, though they will normally be required to have been employed for two years at La Trobe before applying. Applications will be considered by the Academic Promotions Committee as soon as practicable after receipt of the application.

Part C - How to Apply for Promotion

(21) Applicants must consult with their Head of School/Director of Centre/Institute and/or academic supervisor before making an application for promotion. 

(22) Applications must be made using the appropriate application form and must follow the “Instructions for Applicants”. 

(23) The applicant should forward the completed application in electronic form to the Head of School/Director of Centre/Institute so that he or she may provide the required written commentary.

Part D - Upgrading a Reversionary Substantive Position

(24) A staff member who holds a continuing substantive position and is appointed as a result of an externally competitive process to a fixed-term academic position at a higher level at La Trobe may apply for promotion to upgrade their reversionary substantive position. 

(25) Provided that the fixed-term appointment and the substantive position are both research-only positions, the staff member may submit their appointment application in place of the narrative section of their promotion application. All other promotion documentation and reports would be required as for a standard application.

(26) A current Level C member of staff who has been awarded an ARC Future Fellowship at equivalent to Level D rate may apply for promotion on the basis of excellence in research to upgrade his/her substantive position. Provided the applicant applies within 18 months of being awarded the Future Fellowship the committee will accept the reports for the Future Fellowship application in place of the usual assessor reports. The applicant should submit a full standard application for promotion together with the Future Fellowship reports, and also might wish to submit a rejoinder. Reports from the College Pro Vice-Chancellor, Head of School and professor(s) of discipline would be provided as usual with the application.

Part E - Reports Provided With the Application for Promotion

(27) Reports must accompany the application form from:

  1. the Head of School/Director of Centre/Institute 
  2. one or more senior academic staff members with knowledge of the discipline or specialist area and 
  3. the Pro Vice-Chancellor of the relevant College.

(28) A single, combined report should be provided if there is more than one professor/appropriate senior person to be consulted. 

(29) The three reports must be sighted and signed by the applicant. 

(30) The applicant may write to the Chair of the Academic Promotions Committee if s/he wishes to respond to comments made in these reports.

(31) These reports will not be provided to assessors during the promotions process. 

Part F - Submission of Application for Promotion

(32) An electronic copy of the application must be provided to the Executive Officer, Academic Promotions, Governance and Policy Services.

(33) The Executive Officer will acknowledge receipt of applications in writing. 

(34) In cases where applications are not completed fully the Executive Officer will request further material from applicants. 

(35) The Academic Promotions Committee reserves the right to return the application to the applicant for revision.

(36) In unusual circumstances, and with the staff member’s consent, a Head of School may submit an application on behalf of a staff member. 

Part G - Evidence to Support an Application for Promotion

(37) Applicants should normally provide evidence (see Definitions) of achievement in all three areas, while nominating whether promotion is sought on the basis of excellence in teaching or research or both. Applications from Scholarly Teaching Fellows who do not have a workload allocation for Other activities, should address the categories of teaching, and research and scholarly activity, but not that of leadership and engagement activities. The committee will make an assessment based on the overall case.

(38) Indicative examples of performance, achievement and preparation appropriate at each Level of appointment in these three areas are provided in the Academic Promotions Evidence Matrices.

  1. Academic Promotions Evidence Matrix – Teaching
  2. Academic Promotions Evidence Matrix – Research
  3. Academic Promotions Evidence Matrix – Teaching and Research

(39) Applicants may cite other examples to demonstrate their performance and achievements. 

(40) Applicants should take care to elaborate their achievements in each of the relevant areas and must provide supporting evidence for any claims made in their application. Claims which are not backed up by supporting evidence in the application will not be considered by the committee.

(41) Applicants should use relevant up-to-date measures of impact; where there are discipline-specific rankings, a brief explanation of this should be included.

Part H - University Training Requirements for Applicants

(42) Satisfactory completion of 

  1. any staff development or training programs required by the University as preparation for teaching, research supervision, management and leadership roles and 
  2. a formal Equity Staff Development training program. 

Part I - Equal Opportunity and Conflict of Interest

(43) Applicants and Academic Promotions Committee members should bring to the attention of the Chair of the Academic Promotions Committee any instances where they believe that a conflict of interest, discrimination or bias may affect the assessment of applications.

Part J - Confidentiality of Applications

(44) All staff involved in academic promotions will maintain complete confidentiality until the University has made its final decision. At the conclusion of the process feedback will be provided to applicants.

Part K - Assessment of Application

(45) The Academic Promotions Committee will base its decisions on the material provided in the application process and will not take into account information that is known to the Committee, but which is not referred to and supported with evidence in the application. In addition to the views provided by the relevant College Pro Vice-Chancellor, Head of School, Professor(s) and assessors, the Committee will fulfill an important deliberative role in applying its expertise and bringing to bear a University-wide perspective, to determine the outcome of an application.

(46) Staff on fractional or joint appointments, and those whose career paths have been interrupted or delayed due to significant periods of leave for caring responsibilities, illness or other non-work related reasons, must advise the Committee of these circumstances so that their applications may be assessed in terms of what they have achieved, and in particular the quality of that achievement, in relation to the opportunities available. 
Disciplinary differences will be taken into account and, where possible, the committee will use disciplinary norms when assessing applications. If there are matters that require clarification, additional information may be sought by the committee from the Head of School or other appropriate senior person with a knowledge of a particular discipline or specialist area.

Part L - Membership of Academic Promotions Committee

(47) The Academic Promotions Committee, which will consider applications for promotion to all levels, will comprise:

  1. the Chair nominated by the Vice-Chancellor; 
  2. Five professorial members drawn from the Colleges;
  3. up to three nominees of the Vice-Chancellor, selected to ensure expertise in teaching and/or community service, disciplinary balance and gender balance.

(48) The Executive Director, Human Resources may attend meetings, with Observer status. 

(49) The Chair and all members of the Committee will be academic staff members of the University who hold the classification of professor or equivalent. 

(50) The term of membership shall be for three years and retiring members shall be eligible for re-appointment. 

Part M - Terms of Reference of Academic Promotions Committee

(51) The Vice-Chancellor will appoint the Academic Promotions Committee. 

(52) The quorum for a meeting shall be six (6) committee members, including the Chair.

(53) Governance and Policy Services will provide administrative support to the Committee.

(54) The committee normally will meet monthly (with the exception of January and July) to allow staff to prepare their applications for promotion at a time that is appropriate and convenient to them.

Part N - Approval Process

(55) The Academic Promotions Committee will provide recommendations to the Vice-Chancellor arising from each of its meetings. 

(56) The Vice-Chancellor is responsible for approving, or not approving, the recommendations of the Academic Promotions Committee. 

(57) Feedback will be provided where the Committee believes that assessors’ reports and the Committee’s deliberations could be useful for the further development of the applicant’s career.

Part O - Report to Academic Board

(58) The Vice-Chancellor will report promotions to the Academic Board.

Part P - Effective Date of Promotion

(59) Applicants will be advised in writing of a successful promotion outcome and the date from which the promotion will take effect.

(60) Promotion will be effective from the first full pay period commencing on or after the date of the Academic Promotions Committee meeting at which the promotion was recommended. 

Part Q - Salary Point

(61) All promotions will be to the first salary point of the level to which the applicant is promoted.

Part R - Unsuccessful Applicants

(62) Following the Vice-Chancellor's approval of the Academic Promotions Committee recommendations, the Executive Officer will advise unsuccessful applicants in writing. In doing so the Executive Officer will also advise the applicant that they may seek a meeting with the Chair of the Academic Promotions Committee to discuss the outcome of their promotion application.

(63) The Head of School and/or College Pro Vice-Chancellor will meet with each unsuccessful applicant to provide information that would be useful for the future guidance of the applicant. Meetings for this purpose will take place as soon as possible after the Vice-Chancellor has accepted the Committee’s recommendations. 

(64) In meeting with unsuccessful applicants Heads of School and/or College Pro Vice-Chancellors should consider strategies to support and encourage unsuccessful applicants, including such things as:

  1. identifying an academic mentor who can assist the staff member to improve their promotion prospects;
  2. identifying staff development or training opportunities that will address weaknesses in the application;
  3. ensuring that allocated workloads create adequate opportunities for the staff member to develop excellence in their area/s of focus;
  4. where appropriate, encouraging and providing support for additional research opportunities;
  5. providing additional support for staff located in regional centres.

(65) The Academic Promotions Committee will prepare brief comments which may be used for the purpose of counselling and the further development of the applicant’s career.

(66) These may include assessors’ reports and the Committee’s deliberations.

(67) Unsuccessful applicants must ensure they have new and relevant information and evidence to support a new application before re-applying.

Part S - Review of Decision of Academic Promotions Committee

(68) Applicants not recommended for promotion may seek a meeting with the Chair of the Academic Promotions Committee to discuss the outcome of their promotion applications. The Chair may request the member of the Academic Promotions Committee with the closest disciplinary background to participate in such a meeting. At the discretion of the Chair, an unsuccessful application for promotion may be referred back to the Academic Promotions Committee where it can be demonstrated that:

  1. relevant information of a significant nature submitted as part of the application had been overlooked or misinterpreted; or 
  2. clear evidence of a significant procedural irregularity occurred. 

(69) Unsuccessful applicants also have the right to use other University grievance processes or consult the University or State Ombudsman (Ombudsman Statute 2009).

Part T - Responsibilities of Applicants

(70) Applicants must:

  1. be familiar with the promotions procedures and make application in accordance with this document, the Policy, and the instructions provided with the application form;
  2. identify potential assessors in accordance with the criteria set out under section 25 (below) entitled “Assessors”; 
  3. ensure that the application is completed fully and accurately;
  4. inform their Heads of Department of their intention to apply for promotion;
  5. discuss their intention to apply for promotion with the Head of School/Director of Centre/Institute, and provide that person with original evidence of awards, recognition and results of teaching evaluations which are to be used in the application; 
  6. when an applicant presents preliminary material to the Head of School, they might also provide the evidence matrices;
  7. bring to the attention of the Committee, as part of the application, any information related to career interruptions;
  8. sight the comments of the Head of School, professor(s) of discipline/ senior members of the discipline and College Pro Vice-Chancellor, and sign to indicate that these have been sighted;
  9. write to the Chair of the Academic Promotions Committee if they wish to respond to comments by the Head of School, professor(s) of discipline/senior members of the discipline or College Pro Vice-Chancellor;
  10. bring to the attention of the Chair of the Academic Promotions Committee, through the Executive Officer, any matters which they believe might affect the fair and objective assessment of their applications;
  11. be contactable throughout the promotion process.

Part U - Responsibilities of Heads of Schools / Directors of Research Centres / Institutes

(71) The Head of School/Director of Research Centre/Institute must:

  1. identify qualified staff and encourage applications; 
  2. offer well-informed and current advice to applicants seeking promotion; 
  3. give a prompt response when advising a staff member whether they would support an application;
  4. identify potential assessors in accordance with the criteria set out under section Z (below) entitled “Assessors”;
  5. consult, where appropriate, with Heads of Department; 
  6. discuss with the applicant’s supervisor the appropriateness of the staff member applying at this time;
  7. in consultation with the applicant’s performance review supervisor, provide written confirmation of the applicant’s performance in each area against his or her Level, agreed workload allocation and type of appointment. In particular this report should indicate whether performance goals have been met, and should confirm the accuracy of the application;
  8. such comments must be evidence based and should be discussed with the applicant;
  9. the Head of School’s written report should normally be prepared within two weeks from receipt of application;
  10. submit a written evaluation from the relevant professor(s) of the discipline (or senior members of the discipline) in relation to the discipline, including the quality of scholarly publications and research, and contributions to the curriculum; 
  11. encourage applicants to seek evaluations from those with expertise in teaching and learning (eg Curriculum, Teaching and Learning Centre, Associate Pro Vice-Chancellors) where the case relies heavily on excellence in curriculum, teaching and learning; 
  12. provide timely additional information to the Committee in cases requiring clarification or additional information about a particular discipline or specialist area;
  13. make recommendations and offer comments for the Committee about how well the applicant meets the criteria, and specify whether they support the application;
  14. discuss with the Chair of the Academic Promotions Committee and the College Pro Vice-Chancellor the reasons why an unsuccessful applicant was not recommended for promotion;
  15. together with the College Pro Vice-Chancellor provide advice and assistance for unsuccessful applicants aimed at overcoming the reason/s for their lack of success.

Part V - Responsibilities of the College Pro Vice-Chancellor

(72) The College Pro Vice-Chancellor must:

  1. identify appropriately qualified staff in their College and encourage equal application rates from men and women;
  2. give a prompt response when advising a staff member whether they would support an application;
  3. provide a report on each applicant to the Academic Promotions Committee, based on the recommendation of the Head of Schools/Director of Research Centre/Institute and on the College Pro Vice-Chancellor personal knowledge of the applicant;

Level B and C applications

(73) The College Pro Vice-Chancellor will specify whether or not he/she supports the application for promotion, by selecting the appropriate checkbox on the report template (‘I do support the application’ / ‘I do not support the application’).
In cases where the Pro Vice-Chancellor does not support an application, brief written reasons should be provided to the applicant and the Committee.

Level D and E applications

(74) The College Pro Vice-Chancellor will provide comments for the Academic Promotions Committee for each applicant seeking promotion. The Pro Vice-Chancellor should also specify whether or not he/she supports the application for promotion, by selecting the appropriate checkbox on the report template (‘I do support the application’ / ‘I do not support the application’).

  1. the College Pro Vice-Chancellor’s report should normally be prepared within two weeks from their receipt of application;
  2. discuss with the Chair of the Academic Promotions Committee and the Head of School the reasons why an applicant was not recommended for promotion; 
  3. in consultation with the Head of School, identify strategies to provide support and encouragement for unsuccessful applicants aimed at overcoming the reason/s for the applicants lack of success.

Part W - Responsibilities of Academic Promotions Committee

(75) The Academic Promotions Committee must:

  1. assess applications for promotion against the criteria for promotion contained in the Policy. 
  2. consider applications in light of the MSALs for the level to which each applicant is applying, and the demonstrated capacity of the applicant to perform the duties and responsibilities as outlined for that level. 
  3. seek clear evidence of excellence in the contributions to those areas nominated by an applicant.
  4. select appropriate external assessors based on the Head of School’s and the applicant’s nominations, and the area(s) of excellence on which the application is based;
  5. make a judgement about the application for promotion in each of the three areas of teaching; research and scholarly activity;and leadership and engagement;
  6. make an objective assessment of each application that is free of conflict of interest, discrimination or bias;
  7. determine whether an applicant has achieved excellence in the appropriate area(s);
  8. recommend to the Vice-Chancellor whether or not an applicant should be promoted;
  9. provide feedback on applications as appropriate. 

Part X - Responsibilities of Executive Officer, Academic Promotions

(76) The Executive Officer, Academic Promotions, must:

  1. maintain the policy, procedures and evidence matrices in consultation with the Chair of the Academic Promotions Committee;
  2. co-ordinate the receipt, acknowledgment and processing of applications for promotion;
  3. review applications to ensure they are completed in the required form, and refer back to applicants where this is not the case;
  4. provide advice to applicants and advice to Heads of Schools/Directors of Centres/Institutes as required;
  5. co-ordinate the scheduling of Academic Promotions Committee meetings;
  6. follow up on the submission of assessor and other reports to the Academic Promotions Committee;
  7. distribute applications, assessor reports, and other information to the Academic Promotions Committee;
  8. provide secretariat support to the Academic Promotions Committee;
  9. co-ordinate the report of the Academic Promotions Committee to the Vice-Chancellor;
  10. following endorsement of the Academic Promotions Committee's recommendations by the Vice-Chancellor, advise successful and unsuccessful applicants of the outcomes of their applications;
  11. provide Academic Board with regular reports on successful promotion outcomes;
  12. maintain relevant statistical data. 

Part Y - Academic Promotions Committee Deliberations

(77) Upon receipt of applications, the Academic Promotions Committee shall review for each applicant:

  1. the application;
  2. the comments/recommendation of the Head of School or Director of Research Centre/Institute;
  3. the comments/recommendation of the professor(s) of discipline/senior members of the discipline;
  4. the comments/recommendation of the College Pro Vice-Chancellor.

(78) The committee shall then decide whether a prima facie case exists for further consideration of the application. 

(79) The committee will refer applications to assessors external to the University where it is satisfied that a prima facie case for promotion has been established. 

  1. Upon receipt of the assessors’ reports, the committee will reconsider the application and decide whether the applicant has met the criteria for promotion.

Part Z - Assessors

(80) Applicants are asked to nominate three assessors for promotion to Level B or C, or four assessors for Level D or E, who could be asked to assess claims of excellence made in the application in relation to teaching, research, or University, community or professional service. Applicants may also indicate the names of people who may be selected as assessors whom they believe would provide a biased assessment. Reasons for concern must also be provided.

(81) The Head of School is also required to provide the names of three potential assessors for promotion to Level B or C, or four assessors for Level D or E, when completing the Head of School’s report, and to comment on the suitability of the applicant’s nominated assessors. 

(82) Assessors normally should be at least at the level to which the applicant is applying, and preferably higher. And normally some assessors from outside the University should be nominated for all applications. 

(83) Applications for promotion to Level D and E will generally be expected to have international as well as national assessors in their area of research and scholarly activity.

(84) The Assessor does not act as a referee but, rather, as an expert in the field able to offer the Academic Promotions Committee a balanced and confidential assessment of the merits of the particular application according to the stated criteria. Assessors will also provide, if possible, an indication of the applicant's standing in the field. Assessors should preferably be persons of eminence in the discipline who may or may not be known personally to the applicant but who are aware of the applicant's activities in the areas on which the application is based and, normally, with whom the applicant has not collaborated or published. 

(85) While the Committee will use the Head of School's list for guidance, it may take advice from elsewhere when selecting its assessors. The Committee will make the final decision regarding the choice of assessors and applicants will not be informed of their names.

(86) Applicants may wish to consult with the Chair of the Academic Promotions Committee if they have any concerns about the possible choice of assessors by the Head of School.

Part AA - Information Sessions

(87) The Chair of the Academic Promotions Committee, in consultation with Human Resources and Governance and Policy Services, will develop, publicise and conduct information sessions twice a year for potential candidates. Care will be taken to ensure that staff members at regional campuses will have the opportunity to participate in these sessions.

Part BB - Fast-Track Promotion – Exceptional Circumstances

(88) In exceptional circumstances, and when it is deemed by the Vice-Chancellor to be an appropriate mechanism to support the University’s strategic operational goals, an application for promotion may be considered outside of the normal promotions schedule. This may include situations where this University wishes to counter an offer received by a high performing staff member. 

(89) The criteria for fast-track applications will be consistent with the standards expected for promotion through the normal promotions round. The committee also will consider the strategic significance of the staff member’s contributions to the School, College and University.

(90) A College Pro Vice-Chancellor may put forward to the Vice-Chancellor a recommendation that a staff member be considered for fast-track promotion. Documentation submitted by the College Pro Vice-Chancellor should include: 

  1. an up-to date version of the staff member’s curriculum vitae; 
  2. a statement prepared by the staff member providing evidence of his/her contributions to or achievements in each of the three assessment areas;
  3. a statement by the College Pro Vice-Chancellor detailing the exceptional circumstances which would warrant fast-track assessment (including evidence of an offer to the staff member from another University if this is the basis for the case); 
  4. the date by which the applicant must respond to an offer from another University;
  5. the significance of the staff member’s contributions in terms of meeting strategic or operational objectives of the area/University;
  6. an assessment of the staff member’s profile and contributions against the criteria for promotion to that level; 
  7. a list of four assessors nominated by the College Pro Vice-Chancellor in consultation with the professor of discipline or other appropriate senior person with a knowledge of a particular discipline or specialist area. The Pro Vice-Chancellor should ascertain before putting forward the names of assessors, whether they would be willing/available to provide reports at short notice if so requested. 
  8. a statement from the Head of School supporting the promotion. 

(91) The College Pro Vice-Chancellor should forward all of the above documentation in electronic form to the Executive Officer, Academic Promotions Committee, at the time the submission is made to the Vice-Chancellor. 

(92) The Vice-Chancellor will advise the Executive Officer, Academic Promotions Committee, of his recommendation. The Executive Officer will ensure the application is considered by the Committee as soon as practicable.

(93) After reviewing the case, the committee may recommend the payment of a retention allowance as an alternative to promotion.

Top of Page

Section 5 - Definitions

(94) Evidence: externally peer-reviewed outputs, appropriate preparation and staff development, feedback and evaluations from relevant people such as referees, students, supervisors or external partners.

(95) Three Areas: The three areas used in assessing qualification for promotion, as follows:

Teaching

  1. preparation of teaching materials for face to face, online and other modes of delivery
  2. unit and course development, including online, off-campus and off-shore learning materials
  3. delivery of lectures, tutorials, laboratory classes, practicum and clinical education
  4. delivery of online learning
  5. delivery of off-campus, off-shore and distance education
  6. coordination of units and courses
  7. supervision of teaching staff, including casual and sessional staff
  8. supervision of honours year, postgraduate by coursework and a proportion of supervision higher degree research students
  9. supervision of undergraduate students undertaking research projects or fieldwork
  10. preparing and marking and/or moderation of student assessment 
  11. student consultation

Research and scholarly activity

  1. discovery and innovation, 
  2. creative works, 
  3. scholarship of teaching and learning, 
  4. scholarly integration or synthesis, and 
  5. knowledge transfer or application
  6. a proportion of supervision of higher degree by research students.

Leadership and engagement may include

  1. committee participation
  2. organising and/or attending meetings, forums, seminars etc
  3. consultancy
  4. community service
  5. industry liaison and grant funding application 
  6. leadership positions at Department, School, College, regional, University and/or research centre level
  7. leadership through mentoring and building of teams
  8. management and administration
  9. internal and external professional work.

(96) Leadership: leadership in promoting research, developing research training, fostering excellence in teaching and encouraging academic staff development; and the willingness and ability to provide leadership in a discipline, program, School within the University and the community at large.

(97) MSALs: Minimum Standards for Academic Levels

Top of Page

Section 6 - Stakeholders

Responsibility for implementation – Vice-Chancellor; Chair, Academic Promotions Committee; Executive Officer, Academic Promotions, Governance and Policy.
Responsibility for monitoring implementation and compliance – Chair, Academic Promotions Committee; Executive Officer, Academic Promotions, Governance and Policy.