View Current

Academic Promotion Procedure

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

Section 1 - Purpose

(1) This procedure supports the Academic Promotion Policy by outlining the process for promotion of academic staff at Charles Sturt University (the University).

Scope

(2) This procedure applies to full-time, part-time, continuing or fixed-term academic staff applying for promotion to Levels B to E.

Top of Page

Section 2 - Policy

(3) This procedure supports the Academic Promotion Policy.

Top of Page

Section 3 - Procedure

Part A - Eligibility to apply

Eligibility requirements and exclusions

(4) Academic staff may apply for promotion once every two years, if they are eligible under clauses 5-6 and not excluded by clause 7. Unsuccessful applicants may apply in the next round only if advised by the Committee.

(5) Academic staff are eligible for promotion under the following conditions:

They are in a continuing or fixed-term contract position (promotion will not change the term of the contract). This includes staff on parental and carer’s leave (paid and unpaid), long service leave, and other long-term leave arrangements or career breaks.
They meet the University-wide skill base and formal qualification requirements (or equivalency and standing) specified for the level to which they are applying for promotion. See the Academic Staff Qualifications and Expectations Procedure.

(6) Academic staff in the following categories or situations will only be eligible to apply for promotion where the conditions are met:

If they are on probation, they can only apply for promotion where they have been confirmed as having satisfactorily completed the requirements of probation prior to the due date for applications.
If their employment is externally funded, they can only apply for promotion if the funding agreement provides for an increase to support the promotion.
If their appointment is made jointly with an external body, they can only apply for promotion if the terms of the joint appointment agreement allow this.

(7) Academic staff are not eligible for promotion in the following situations:

They are currently on a performance improvement plan.
They have received a written disciplinary sanction from the Vice-Chancellor since 31 July in the previous year.

Required qualifications or equivalent

(8) To be considered for promotion to an academic level, the staff member must:

have the level of qualification required for that academic level, or
prior to the due date for submission of an Intent to Apply (ITA), have been assessed by the University's qualifications and equivalence assessment panel (QEAP) as having a combination of qualification(s), achievements and/or experience equivalent to the level of qualification required for that academic level.

(9) The Academic Staff Qualifications and Expectations Procedure outlines qualification requirements for each academic level and states the process for promotion applicants to request a qualification equivalence assessment.

Part B - Pre-application actions and timing

Preparing for a promotion application

(10) Academic staff must discuss their intention to apply for promotion with their supervisor, at the latest, in the year prior to the intended application during their annual Performance Planning Development Review (PPDR), but preferably earlier than this so that adequate preparation and planning can occur as a specified goal in the applicant’s development plan. Applicants must have achieved all goals set in the year prior before applying.

(11) Prospective applicants:

must assess whether they are eligible for promotion and hold the required qualifications or equivalent with reference to minimum criteria
should update all publication and research databases prior to submitting an application. It is the applicants responsibility to check all timelines for the updating of databases with the Academic Promotion Team.
should contact the Academic Promotion Team about the opportunity to be partnered with a promotion mentor to advise them in preparing their promotion application.

(12) The Academic Promotion Team will coordinate information sessions for prospective applicants, supervisors and promotion mentors which are held around the time of the opening of the Intent to Apply.

Period under consideration

(13) Achievements and impact under consideration for the promotion application will be the period since the last promotion, or the last five years, whichever is the shortest.

Call for applications

(14) The Academic Promotion Team will initiate the annual round of promotions by announcing a call for submissions of Intent to Apply.

(15) Prospective applicants must submit an Intent to Apply (ITA) form by the due date in order for their application to be considered (see Part C). The ITA must be signed by the applicant’s supervisor to confirm that they are aware of this intent.

(16) An ITA submitted after the due date will only be accepted if it is endorsed by the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) or equivalent (or their nominee).

Out of round promotion

(17) An academic staff member may be considered for promotion outside of the annual promotion round where the Vice-Chancellor or a Deputy Vice-Chancellor requests that an out-of-round promotion application be considered on the basis of retention.

(18) The application and decision-making process for an out-of-round promotion will be the same as for a promotion application in an annual promotion round.

Part C - Application

Application requirements

(19) Applicants must use the Academic Promotion Application form and provide all documents outlined below. All documents must be submitted by 5pm on the closing date. Applications will not be considered if they are:

incomplete or late
an ITA form was not provided in time (see Part B).

(20) Applications must:

be in accordance with the Code of Conduct
not exceed the word/page limits of a particular field or section within the application form – the delegated officers and promotion committees will not consider anything beyond the stated limits.

(21) Applications may be withdrawn at any time prior to the relevant promotion committee meeting.

(22) The following documents must be submitted to the Academic Promotion Team (by email to academicpromotions@csu.edu.au) by 5 pm on the specified closing date(s) for the application to be considered complete:

Essential document	Format	Prepared and submitted by	Due
Intent to Apply	Form	Applicant Supervisor confirms applicant’s eligibility to apply prior to submission	Intention to Apply due date
Qualification equivalence assessment (if the applicant does not have the necessary qualification)	QEAP Assessment Outcome letter	Prepared by QEAP, submitted by applicant	Intention to Apply due date
Application form	Application Form	Applicant	Application closing date
Eligibility checklist	Checklist	Applicant Signed by supervisor prior to submission to confirm evidence and claims.	Application closing date
Supporting evidence (see evidence guide)	PDF	Applicant, following supervisor confirmation	Application closing date
Supervisor’s checklist (confirming, to the best of their knowledge, the information provided in each application is true and correct at the time of submission).	Checklist	Applicant’s supervisor	Application closing date

Supporting evidence and reports

(23) The Academic Promotion Evidence Guide sets out specific evidence and standards. This may include:

Supervisor’s declaration confirming that the supervisor has verified the evidence of any achievements claimed by the applicant. The supervisor’s declaration does not make recommendations in relation to promotion.
If including teaching in the application, a subject experience survey (SuES) ratings and summative peer reviews (including HDR supervision).
If including research in the application, the applicant’s research outputs and any research funding.
The applicant’s employment history at the University including work function and employment fraction.
An explanation of the discipline context of the applicant’s claimed achievements.

Referee and independent assessor reports

(24) In addition to the evidence submitted by the applicant, the following referee and independent assessor requirements must be met:

Promotion to	Minimum requirements
Level B	Two referees nominated by the applicant on the application form, at least one must be external to the University.
Level C	Three referees nominated by the applicant on the application form, at least one must be external to the University
Level D	Three independent assessor reports. (See clauses 29-30) Assessors must be at associate professor level (Level D) or above. Assessors must be of national or international standing in their discipline. All assessors will be external to the University, unless the chair of the relevant promotion committee agrees to an internal evaluator because they are an acknowledged international authority in the discipline.
Level E	Three independent assessor reports. (See clauses 29-30) Assessors must be at professor level (Level E) or above. Assessors must be of international standing in their discipline. All assessors will be external to the University.

Referees nominated by the applicant

(25) Applicants should get agreement from their nominated referees before submitting their name. Applicants should not nominate someone as a referee if:

they have a familial or personal relationship, or business or financial interests in common (professional relationships are normal and expected), or
they are their current supervisor or are directly involved in the assessment process, including members of the current promotion committee.

(26) The Academic Promotion Team will contact the nominated referees and provide them with a referee report template and electronic copies of the application, the evidence guide, including supporting statements of achievements for the appropriate academic level and the minimum activities expected of the academic level. The applicant will not be given a copy of the referee reports.

External referees

(27) Referees are considered external to the University if they have not been a staff member or adjunct staff member of the University within the five years before the year of the promotion application. Otherwise, they are considered an internal referee.

(28) External referees can be an academic or a senior professional, business or community leader and must have experience and esteem in the applicant’s discipline, and knowledge of the applicant’s work.

Independent assessors

(29) An independent assessor must:

be someone external to the University (with the same conditions that apply to external referees at clause 27, subject to the exception for Level D promotions at clause 24)
be at the appropriate academic level for the promotion level (see clause 24) or of equivalent standing in industry, government or community
be recognised in their field
have knowledge of the discipline or area relevant to the application, including standards and expectations of academics within the discipline or area
be able to provide an objective assessment of the quality of the applicant’s work and an independent assessment of an application
not have worked directly with the applicant in the last five years
not cause any actual, potential or perceived conflict of interest.

(30) The process for obtaining independent assessor reports is as follows:

The applicant will provide their supervisor with a list of five potential independent assessors. The supervisor can consult with the Executive Dean, members of the applicant’s academic discipline or a closely related discipline to seek guidance to help with finalising the list.
The supervisor will rank the nominated assessors and forward these to the Academic Promotion Team.
The first three assessors on the list will be contacted and asked to complete an assessor report for the applicant. The Academic Promotion Team will progress through the list until three assessors have agreed to complete a report.
The assessors will be provided with an assessor report template and electronic copies of the application, the evidence guide, including supporting statements of achievements for the appropriate academic level and the minimum activities expected of the academic level.
The applicant will not be advised of the final selection of independent assessors.
Assessor reports are strictly confidential. Delegated officers, members of promotion committees, and others who have a right to view the reports are bound by confidentiality. Under no circumstances should the contents of independent assessor reports be discussed or made available to applicants.

The case for promotion

(31) Academic staff are allocated a mix of academic activities within their designated work function (position). Academic activities are identified as Teaching, Research/Creative, Professional Activity and Service, and the task requirements of these activities are outlined in the Academic Workload Policy [in development] and the Charles Sturt University Enterprise Agreement. Within their position academic staff have specific proportions of one or more of these academic activities allocated to them.

(32) To be promoted, an applicant must have satisfied the decision-maker(s) that they are meeting:

performance expectations for their current academic level in the academic activities required of their position, and
at least the University's minimum expectations of performance for the academic level to which they are seeking promotion (as outlined in Schedule VI of the 2023-2025 Enterprise Agreement).
1. Note: it will strengthen an application if the applicant demonstrates achievement at a higher level than their current one across all the allocated academic activities of their current position. However, this is not essential to promotion: outstanding performance in one or two areas of academic activity may be sufficient.

(33) Applicants need to show in their application for promotion that they can meet at least minimum expectations across all work areas of academic activity of the level to which they are seeking promotion, but can focus their application on areas of strength. In order to focus their case, and to provide greater evidence for areas of strength, the application form provides the applicant with the capacity to provide a weighting for each area of academic activity, with the opportunity to provide more evidence of achievement in higher weighted areas.

(34) An applicant is expected to demonstrate that their achievements have had the scope of influence and breadth/depth of effect that is expected at the academic level to which they are seeking promotion. It is not sufficient to list achievements, the applicant must explain:

how the achievements have been influential, and
provide evidence of their influence/effect.

Part D - Promotion committees

Promotion to Level B

(35) As per Delegation Schedule B - People and Culture and the Academic Promotion Policy, the delegated officer will approve an application for promotion from associate lecturer (level A) to lecturer (level B). These applications do not need consideration by a promotion committee.

(36) The delegated officer will apply the Academic Staff Qualifications and Expectations Procedure, the Academic Promotion Evidence Guide and Part F of this procedure (as relevant) when assessing promotion applications and deciding whether to approve promotion.

Promotion to Level C and above.

(37) As per Delegation Schedule B - People and Culture and the Academic Promotion Policy, applications for promotion above Level B must be considered by a Promotion Committee or Professorial Promotion Committee and recommended to the delegated officer.

Pool of faculty staff

(38) At the start of each year, each Executive Dean will nominate four academic staff of the faculty to be available to serve on the promotion committees, as follows:

To serve on the Promotion Committee: two academic staff members at senior lecturer level (Level C) or above who must have achieved at least the minimum research performance for their academic level stated in the Research Productivity Index Guide, and at least one of whom must have expertise in the scholarship of learning and teaching.
To serve on the Professorial Promotion Committee: two academic staff members at professor level (Level E) who must have achieved at least the minimum research performance for their academic level stated in the Research Productivity Index Guide, and at least one of whom must have expertise in the scholarship of learning and teaching.
In selecting nominees for each committee pool, the Executive Dean will:
1. exclude members of the faculty academic leadership team
2. nominate a balance of genders, and
3. select nominees from different schools within the faculty and as far as possible from different campuses, provided the campuses have enough staff at the requisite academic levels to share the academic promotion committee work.
Not all of these nominees will have to be members of a committee in the year.
Each staff member will be nominated for the pool for two successive years, to ensure some continuity of committee membership. Accordingly, Executive Deans will change half of their nominations in each year.
If a staff member nominated for the faculty pool leaves the University before the relevant promotion committee has completed its work for the year, the relevant Executive Dean may nominate a replacement who meets the requirements for the nomination stated above.
Where a nominated faculty staff member is selected for the committee and has to read applications and attend meetings, the time needed for this will be recognised in their annual Performance Planning Development Review (PPDR) process. The time needed for this will be discussed and agreed with the nominated faculty member’s supervisor, and recognised in their performance agreement.
Where a nominated faculty staff member is selected for the committee, they are expected to have completed the Unconscious Bias and First Nations Cultural Awareness Journey modules before commencing work on the committee. The time needed to complete these modules will be recognised in their annual Performance Planning Development Review (PPDR) process.

(39) The Academic Promotion Team will publish a list of the Executive Deans’ nominees for the pool of promotion committee members.

(40) Where an applicant for promotion considers that someone on the list may have a conflict of interest in assessing their application, they should provide details to the Academic Promotion Team, who will forward these to the chair of the relevant promotion committee to assess and manage the conflict.

Promotion Committee membership and quorum

(41) The Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) convenes the Promotion Committee, ensuring, as far as practicable, 40:40:20 gender representation.

(42) The voting members of the Promotion Committee will be the following:

An Executive Dean and/or the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research)/Pro Vice-Chancellor Research (Performance and Governance) will be appointed as chair/co-chairs.
Three academic staff members from the pool of faculty staff (see clause 38a) ensuring a minimum of one from each faculty, selected to ensure that the committee has both research and teaching expertise. Where not enough faculty nominees are available to fill the faculty places on the committee or ensure a gender balance, the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) may add another faculty academic staff member who is at the requisite academic level.
Pro Vice-Chancellor (Learning and Teaching) or their nominee.
Pro Vice-Chancellor Research (Performance and Governance) or their nominee.
Pro Vice-Chancellor (First Nations Strategy) or their nominee (from the academic staff).
Any members/membership adjustments required under clause 49 where requested by a First Nations applicant.

(43) A committee member will not be involved where the committee is considering the application of a staff member for whom they are the immediate supervisor, or for any other real, potential or perceived conflict of interest.

(44) The quorum of the committee is five voting members.

Professorial Promotion Committee membership and quorum

(45) The Vice-Chancellor convenes the Professorial Promotion Committee, ensuring as far as practicable, 40:40:20 gender representation.

(46) The voting members of the Professorial Promotion Committee will be the following:

Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) or, in their absence, the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research) (chair).
Three academic staff members from the pool of faculty staff (see clause 38b) ensuring a minimum of one from each faculty and selected to ensure that the committee has both research and teaching expertise. Where not enough faculty nominees are available to fill the faculty places on the committee or ensure a gender balance, the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) may add another faculty academic staff member who is at the requisite academic level.
Pro Vice-Chancellor (Learning and Teaching) or their nominee.
Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research) or their nominee.
Pro Vice-Chancellor (First Nations Strategy) or their nominee (from the academic staff).
Up to three professors from one or more other universities, at least one of whom must have expertise in the scholarship of learning and teaching.
Any members/membership adjustments required under clause 49 where requested by a First Nations applicant.

(47) A committee member will not be involved where the committee is considering the application of a staff member for whom they are the immediate supervisor, or for any other real, potential or perceived conflict of interest.

(48) A quorum of the committee will be five voting members.

First Nations cultural adjustment to committee membership

(49) Where an applicant identifies as a First Nations person, they may ask that the committee membership be adjusted to ensure the committee has a thorough understanding of First Nations focused achievements. In this case, for that application only:

the committee will be chaired by the Pro Vice-Chancellor (First Nations Strategy) or a professor who is a First Nations person, who will be a voting member of the committee
the nominal chair may remain as a voting member
an academic staff member of the University or an external institution who is a First Nations person, and who is at or above the academic level to which the applicant is seeking promotion, may be added to the committee as a voting member
the quorum with this different membership will be 5 voting members
if practicable, an Elder of a First Nations community in one of the regions serviced by the University may attend the meeting as an adviser. They will not be a voting committee member or part of the quorum.

(50) Notwithstanding clause 49, where a First Nations academic staff member of the University or an external institution and/or an Elder are not available to attend the meeting despite the chair’s best efforts, the committee may proceed to make a decision without them.

Advisory staff to promotion committees

(51) The following staff may attend a promotion committee meeting and advise the committee on the matters stated, but will not otherwise contribute to discussions or vote:

Executive Dean of an applicant’s faculty or Pro Vice-Chancellor of an applicant’s office, centre or division.
The head of an applicant’s school (or faculty office or divisional equivalent, research institute or centre), to further advise the committee on claimed research, teaching or professional engagement achievements where required.
A senior Division of People and Culture staff member to advise on the academic promotion process and relevant policies and procedures.
A member of the Division of People and Culture Equity, Diversity and Inclusion team, to advise on equity aspects of applications and unconscious bias.

(52) Where any of the above advisers are not available to attend, the committee may proceed to make decisions without them.

Committee servicing

(53) The Academic Promotion Team will schedule promotion committee meetings, invite members and advisers, provide the application documentation, attend the meeting, record the procedings and prepare recommendations for approval.

(54) A staff member from the office of the committee chair will attend the meeting to:

take notes of decisions and the feedback that the committee agrees should be given to each applicant, and
within ten working days after the committee completes its promotion recommendation for the academic promotion round, send the reviewed feedback to the Academic Promotion Team for use during the feedback meetings.

Conflicts of interest

(55) Where a committee member has a real, potential or perceived conflict of interest in relation to an application, they will immediately inform the Academic Promotion Team. The Academic Promotion Team will advise the chair of the committee, who will handle the conflict of interest in accordance with the University's Conflict of Interest Procedure.

(56) Committee members are expected to declare conflicts of interest as soon as the Academic Promotion Team informs the committee of the applicants under consideration.

(57) Managing a conflict of interest may involve a replacement committee member for the consideration of that application (if possible) or excluding the member from the meeting while the committee considers the application.

Part E - Assessment and decision processes

Preliminary assessment of applications (for promotion committees)

(58) Promotion committee members will assess applications and submit a completed assessment template to the Academic Promotion Team at least three business days before the committee meeting.

(59) Where an applicant exceeds the word/page limits of a particular field or section within the application form, to be fair to other applicants and encourage concision, committee members will not consider anything stated beyond the word limit.

Application assessments and considerations

(60) Applications for promotion will be assessed on the following:

The applicant’s written promotion application.
The evidence and reports provided as per the Academic Promotion Evidence Guide and Part C of this procedure.
Discussion with the applicant (as per clauses 62-64).
Where the applicant has previously applied for the promotion unsuccessfully, the record of the feedback provided for the applicant at that time.

(61) Promotion decision-makers will apply the Academic Promotion Evidence Guide in assessing promotion applications and deciding whether (as relevant) to recommend or approve promotion.

Discussion with applicant

(62) The delegated officer (for Level B promotions) or the promotion committee may contact a promotion applicant for a short discussion where they need clarification on an aspect of the application.

(63) The Academic Promotion Team will advise applicants of the date(s) and time(s) that they may be contacted. Applicants should ensure they are available for a video conference or phone discussion at the time(s) advised.

(64) If the applicant cannot be contacted or is unable to participate by video conference or phone, the promotion decision may be made without a discussion with the applicant.

Equity advice

(65) Where an equity concern has been identified for an applicant, prior to the discussion of that application, the Equity, Diversity and Inclusion adviser will brief the committee on how the application for promotion has been impacted by the identified concern or concerns, and how the committee should take this into consideration in its deliberations. The Equity, Diversity and Inclusion adviser undertakes an educative role for the committee, and does not advocate on behalf of individual applicants.

Promotion by more than one academic level

(66) Where an applicant has applied for promotion by two academic levels, a promotion committee may recommend such a promotion, if the committee has authority to consider promotion to both levels.

(67) Where the Promotion Committee supports an application from a lecturer (Level B) for promotion to associate professor (Level D), the committee will:

recommend the promotion to senior lecturer (Level C) to the relevant Executive Dean (or DVCRE or their nominee), and
forward the application to the Professorial Promotion Committee to consider recommending the applicant for promotion to associate professor (Level D) to the Vice-Chancellor.

Disciplinary process after submission of an application

(68) An applicant who is subject to a disciplinary process after submitting an application (that is, during the annual academic promotion round) may be considered for promotion without prejudice, pending the outcome of the disciplinary process:

Where the promotion committee recommends promotion of an applicant who is subject to a disciplinary process, the delegated officer will delay their decision on the promotion until the disciplinary process is complete.
If the disciplinary process finds that the applicant has committed misconduct, the applicant is ineligible for promotion in that year.

Promotion committee recommendations

(69) The promotion committee members will discuss each application and vote on whether to recommend the applicant for promotion. All decisions are provisional until moderation is complete:

For a committee to recommend promotion, 50% plus one of the quorate (rounded up to the nearest whole number) must have voted in favour.
After the vote, the committee will discuss and agree on the feedback to be provided to applicants (written for unsuccessful and verbal for successful).
Where the decision is not to recommend promotion of an applicant, the committee will decide whether:
1. it is willing to consider another application from that applicant in the following year, or
2. the applicant must wait at least two years to apply again.

Moderation of committee recommendations

(70) At the end of the promotions meetings each promotion committee will review its decision on each individual application to determine whether the decision was consistent with the set of decisions made throughout the meeting, and whether any individual application should be revisited.

(71) Any committee member may request the chair to open the discussion again on any application. Following this discussion, a vote may again be taken, and the second vote will be final. Where an application is not revisited, the provisional vote will be final.

Academic promotion approvals

(72) The Academic Promotion Team will submit the committee decisions to the delegated officer as per Delegation Schedule B - People and Culture. The delegated officer will make the final decision on whether to approve the promotion and advise the Academic Promotion Team.

Recordkeeping

(73) Committee members, advisers and record keepers will, after the meeting, return any material handed out for the meeting to the Academic Promotion Team and delete the promotion applications and their attachments from their computers and devices.

(74) The Academic Promotion Team will retain and dispose of the applications and attachments in accordance with the Records Management Policy.

Notification of promotion decisions

(75) The Academic Promotion Team will:

within two business days of receiving the delegated officer’s determination inform the applicant’s Executive Dean or equivalent, or a senior academic member of staff nominated by the Executive Dean, who will contact the applicant either face-to-face or by phone to tell them of the outcome of their application.
within five business days of the same date the Academic Promotion Team will notify the applicant of the outcome in writing.

Successful applicants and implementation

(76) Successful applicants can request verbal feedback (request must be made within four weeks of the committee) on their application from the chair of their promotion committee.

(77) Promotion for successful applicants:

in the annual promotion round, is effective from the first pay period after 1 January each year (other than those waiting on outcomes of a review of decision)
for out-of-round promotions, is effective from the first pay period after the Academic Promotion Team notifies the applicant in writing that the promotion has been approved.

(78) From commencement of that pay period, the applicant will use the title appropriate to their new academic level.

Feedback for unsuccessful applicants

(79) To assist with subsequent applications and development, unsuccessful applicants will be provided with verbal feedback from the chair of their relevant promotion committee (or nominee). Where possible, the applicant’s supervisor (or nominee) should attend the feedback meeting.

(80) Written feedback will be provided after the verbal feedback is provided.

(81) To assist staff in addressing the feedback provided, supervisors will meet with unsuccessful applicants to develop a performance development plan, where appropriate.

Re-application timeframe

(82) When an application is unsuccessful, the delegated officer (for Level B promotions) or relevant promotion committee will specify a timeframe of either one or two years before the applicant can reapply. The unsuccessful applicant will be advised of the re-application timeframe.

Review of decisions

(83) An unsuccessful applicant may apply for a review of a decision where there are grounds for such a review, as set out in the Academic Promotion Policy.

(84) To be considered, the request for a review must be submitted to the Academic Promotion Team (email address: academicpromotions@csu.edu.au) within 20 business days from the date of the feedback meeting.

(85) The Vice-Chancellor may decline to progress a review that they consider does not meet the grounds for review.

(86) Where the Vice-Chancellor upholds the grounds for a review, they will either:

for Level B or C promotion decisions, refer the outcome to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) to convene the Promotion Committee to consider the promotion application afresh, or
for Level D or E promotion decisions, convene the Professoriate Promotion Committee to consider the promotion application afresh.

(87) The committee that considers a promotion application afresh, as the outcome of a review of a decision, will be convened with a different chair and as far as practicable with different members from the membership of the committee that made the original recommendation.

(88) After the relevant promotion committee has considered the promotion application, the chair of the committee will advise the Vice-Chancellor of the committee’s decision and the reasons for it.

(89) The further decision of the promotion committee will be final. There will be no further review of the decision within the University.

(90) The Vice-Chancellor will advise the applicant of the decision as soon as possible.

Top of Page

Section 4 - Guidelines

(91) See Academic Promotion Evidence Guide.

Top of Page

Section 5 - Glossary

(92) This procedure uses terms defined in the Academic Promotion Policy, as well as the following:

40:40:20 gender representation – means at least 40% female and 40% male representation, and 20% unspecified.
Academic Promotion Team - means the staff of the Division of People and Culture who provide administrative support to the academic promotion process. The team’s email address is: academicpromotions@csu.edu.au.
Business days – means days when the University is open; excludes weekends and other days when the University or the relevant campus of the University is closed.
Conflict of interest – has the meaning stated in the Conflict of Interest Procedure.
Delegated officer – means the approval authority for the decision, as set out in Delegation Schedule B - People and Culture.
Faculty academic leadership team – means the Executive Dean, Deputy Dean, Heads of School, Associate Deans and Sub Deans of a faculty.
Fraction – means the proportion of a full-time position for which a staff member is employed by the University.
Level of qualification – means the Australian Qualifications Framework (Second Edition January 2013) level of qualification required for appointment or promotion to an academic level of position. The Academic Staff Qualifications and Expectations Procedure states these levels of qualification.
PPDR – means the University's Performance Planning Development Review process and the online system that supports this.
Research output – has the meaning stated in the Research Policy.
Supervisor – means a staff member’s line manager with whom they complete the PPDR process each year.