• Section 1 - Purpose
• Scope
• Section 2 - Policy
• Academic promotions objectives
• Authority to approve promotions
• Review of decisions
• Reporting and review
• Section 3 - Procedure
• Section 4 - Guidelines
• Section 5 - Glossary

Section 1 - Purpose

(1) This policy states how Charles Sturt University (the University) will handle promotion of academic staff.

Scope

(2) This policy applies to:

1. all full-time, part-time, continuing or fixed-term academic staff applying for promotion to Levels B to E, and 
2. anyone else who participates in the academic staff promotions process as an:
   1. applicant
   2. supervisor
   3. assessor
   4. referee
   5. promotion decision-maker, or
   6. manager or administrator of the process.

(3) This policy does not apply to adjunct staff or casual academic staff.

Section 2 - Policy

Academic promotions objectives

(4) Academic promotions will be handled to meet the following objectives.

1. Academic promotions will:
   1. reward academic achievement
   2. provide academic staff with reasonable career progression opportunities within the University, and
   3. support the University's efforts to maintain and raise academic quality, by promoting academic staff who have raised their level of academic or professional influence and academic or professional leadership.
2. The academic promotion process will:
   1. be culturally safe for First Nations Australian applicants
   2. as far as practicable, ensure equity and inclusion in promotion decision-making for applicants who belong to key diversity groups
   3. be as straightforward for applicants as possible
   4. enable applicants to identify circumstances that have reduced their time or capacity to achieve, so that promotion decision-makers can assess their achievements fairly relative to their opportunity to achieve
   5. enable applicants to make a case for promotion based on achievements and impact through academic activities of teaching, research/creative, professional, and service, and to indicate the relative weighting of each activity in their promotion case
   6. be confidential, so that applicants’ information provided in their application and, where an application is unsuccessful, the fact that they have applied and the outcome, are known only to those involved in supporting and deciding the application, unless the applicant chooses otherwise, and
   7. provide support to applicants, supervisors and promotion decision-makers to familiarise them with the process and its expectations.
3. Academic promotion decision-making will:
   1. be evidence based
      1. where the University holds data in a central system (e.g., research publications, student evaluations), system-generated reports will constitute the evidence for the promotion case, and applicants provide commentary showing impact. 
      2. additional evidence of achievement and impact relevant to the work activities, and provided by the applicant, will be taken into account in the decision process. 
   2. support the University's equal opportunity policies, strategies and plans by including consideration of applicants’ identification and circumstances that have impacted their access to opportunities to achieve, and
   3. be reasonably consistent, so that it allows for different disciplinary contexts, and so that applications based on similar evidence of levels of achievement are likely to have similar outcomes.

Authority to approve promotions

(5) Delegated officer as per Delegation Schedule B - People and Culture will make the final decision on whether to approve a promotion.

Review of decisions

(6) An unsuccessful applicant may ask for a review of a decision if there is evidence of a breach of this policy or the Academic Promotion Procedure which has been a significant factor in the decision not to promote the applicant. Review requests must be submitted to Vice-Chancellor for consideration.

Reporting and review

(7) The Vice-Chancellor will early in each year, after any promotion decision review from the previous year’s promotion round have been decided, provide a report to Academic Senate on the promotion round and any out-of-round promotions in that previous year.

(8) The Vice-Chancellor's report will enable Senate to understand how the academic promotion process is meeting the objectives of this policy.

Section 3 - Procedure

(9) This policy should be read in conjunction with the following procedures:

1. Academic Promotion Procedure
2. Academic Staff Qualifications and Expectations Procedure

Section 4 - Guidelines

(10)  See Academic Promotion Evidence Guide (in development).

Section 5 - Glossary

(11) For the purposes of this policy, the following terms have the definitions stated:

1. Academic activity – means an activity identified in the Enterprise Agreement (30.12) as contributing to an academic staff member’s work function.
2. Academic level – means one of the five levels identified under the Enterprise Agreement: associate lecturer (level A), lecturer (level B), senior lecturer (level C), associate professor (level D) and professor (level E).
3. Adjunct staff – as defined in the Visiting and Adjunct Appointments Policy.
4. Assessor – means someone who provides a written assessment of an applicant’s eligibility for promotion based on their application and related documents.
5. Key diversity groups – means people who identify as being members of under-represented groups and those who experience intersectional barriers, bias or discrimination, as identified in the Workplace Diversity and Inclusion Plan.  
6. Promotion committee – means the University's Promotion Committee or Professorial Promotion Committee.
7. Promotion decision-maker – means the Vice-Chancellor, an Executive Dean, a member of a promotion committee or a promotion committee as a whole.
8. Referee – means someone who provides written support for an applicant’s case for promotion based on their knowledge of the applicant’s achievements and impact.