View Current

Academic Staff Promotion Procedure

This is not a current document. To view the current version, click the link in the document's navigation bar.

Section 1 - Purpose

(1) This Procedure collects and details all procedural aspects of the academic staff promotion process at Charles Sturt University (the University) It serves two functions and two client groups. All persons involved in the Academic Promotion process will refer to this document to ensure that policy and procedure are followed and identify whom they should consult should issues arise.

(2) Firstly, it describes all management aspects of the process from inception to completion of the annual round of academic promotions at the University.

(3) Secondly, it advises applicants on how to:

  1. prepare a case for promotion, supported by evidence and documentation; and
  2. prepare an application in the prescribed manner, format and page limits.

Scope

(4) This Procedure applies to:

  1. academic staff of the University, who hold a fixed-term or continuing appointment in a full-time or fractional capacity at Level A, B, C, or D;
  2. the Academic Staff Promotion Committee appropriate to the applicant's level; and
  3. staff involved in the administration of Academic Promotion applications and documentation.
Top of Page

Section 2 - Glossary

(5) Refer to the Academic Staff Promotion Policy for the glossary.

Top of Page

Section 3 - Policy

(6) Refer to the Academic Staff Promotion Policy.

Top of Page

Section 4 - Procedures

Management of the Promotion Process

(7) The process by which promotion applications are coordinated will be structured so that promotion decisions:

  1. are fair, equitable and timely;
  2. are based on a fair and evidence based assessment of merit relative to established academic disciplinary norms;
  3. maintain academic standards of the University, particularly in the quality of teaching, research, scholarship, creative activity and professional practice; and
  4. are consistent with the University interpretation of performance standards and the University mission.

Support of Candidates in Preparing for Promotion

(8) The University regards promotion as a recognition and reward for sustained outstanding performance at the existing level of appointment, and provides support to staff to maximise their opportunity for success (see the Academic Staff Promotion Guidelines for Applicants).

(9) Support mechanisms provided for applicants include provision of workshops (also available on-line) and resources such as the Report covering the review of academic promotions and a formal academic mentor .

(10) Mentors will be drawn from the pool of successful promotion applicants. Staff suited to this mentoring role will have been identified by the Division of Human Resources and provided with training by the Division as necessary.

Role of Supervisor

(11) The supervisor has a key role in all stages of a candidate's promotion, particularly in assisting and advising candidates in the preparation of their application.

(12) The supervisor, with the assistance of the Division of Human Resources, will identify one or more suitable mentors for the applicant and ensure that the mentoring process is occurring.

(13) Both the supervisor and academic mentor will be trained and equipped to give consistent and accurate informed advice to the applicant (see the Academic Staff Promotion Guidelines for Supervisors, Committee Members and Administration).

(14) The supervisor, in consultation with the direct line manager of the supervisor (typically the Head of School and Executive Dean), will play a strong role in providing advice and comment on the quality of the application and whether it builds a compelling case for promotion, which shows national or international significance beyond the School, Faculty and University level.

(15) The supervisor will select referees, in accordance with clauses 58-72 of this Procedure, who are familiar with and can provide objective, independent, clear and authoritative assessment of the work of an applicant. For an application to be successful, the referees must support the case for promotion and affirm the quality of the achievements and the associated evidence.

(16) Further guidance on the role of the supervisor in promotions is available in the Academic Staff Promotion Guidelines for Supervisors, Committee Members and Administration.

Preparing for a Promotion Application

(17) It is important that promotion is seen as one aspect of career development. An application for promotion should be prepared well in advance. Two years prior to lodging an application, a candidate should have commenced discussions with colleagues and advised their supervisor of their intention during their Employee Development and Review Scheme meetings. This will allow sufficient time for mentoring and support in crafting the narrative to provide a better understanding of what is required in putting a case forward for promotion. An applicant must be prepared to be ruthless in making changes as the application progresses.

(18) When an applicant advises their supervisor of intent to apply for promotion, the supervisor should discuss potential referees with the applicant and clearly articulate why and how referees will be chosen.

Preparation Activity

(19) Prior to commencing an application for promotion, applicants should ensure that they have:

  1. read and understood the Academic Staff Promotion Policy and Procedure and confirmed their eligibility to apply;
  2. read this document and the Teaching and Professional Work Function Policy - Professional Activity to determine the basis for their application for academic promotion;
  3. discussed their intention to apply with their supervisor at their annual Employee Development and Review Scheme meeting;
  4. become familiar with the support provided by the University and attended annual staff information sessions to understand the process of Academic Staff Promotion;
  5. formally notified their supervisor by 30 April that they will be applying for promotion that year;
  6. gathered evidence to support their application;
  7. considered ways in which to demonstrate continual growth as an academic, especially their future capacity to contribute at the academic level to which promotion is sought;
  8. discussed with their supervisor a suitable pool of referees who can comment effectively on their work and who can attest to their national and/or international standing; and
  9. identified other people to read their application for clarity, impact and repetition. These selected colleagues may know the applicant's work. Consideration may also be given to choosing a colleague from another discipline area to ensure that the application is suitable to be read by a wide audience. It should be borne in mind that committee members may be drawn from a wide range of different disciplines, and some members may be external to the University.

Applications for Promotion

(20) The Division of Human Resources will call for applications on 15 May of each year.

(21) If the Vice-Chancellor decides to place a limit on the number of positions available at any or each academic level, then the number of promotion positions available will be publicised when inviting applications for promotion.

(22) Applicants for promotion are to complete their application on-line, adhering to all requirements in the Academic Staff Promotion Policy and Procedure, and submit the completed application by the advertised closing date (31 August of each year).

Completing the Application

(23) After reviewing the Academic Staff Promotion Policy, Procedure, Guidelines for Applicants and Guidelines for Supervisors, Committee Members and Administration, and complying with the information in clause 19 of this Procedure, an applicant should complete the on-line application form.

(24) Applicants must provide the relevant Academic Staff Promotion Committeewith a clearly articulated written case for promotion to the academic level sought. In completing the application, the information contained in the Academic Staff Promotion Guidelines for Applicants should be considered.

The Application Form

Application Part 1: Personal Information

(25) The candidate must complete basic information on the application form identifying the applicant and assigning percentages to the different domains of academic work.

(26) The assigned percentages need not duplicate but should align with the percentages used in any relevant workload allocation model (e.g. as part of a career development process such as the Employee Development and Review Scheme) and should conform with the limits set by the relevant classification standard for the type of appointment held by the candidate. In assigning percentages, applicants should take care to realistically consider their areas of strength (see the Academic Staff Promotion Guidelines for Applicants).

(27) Staff can provide information in this section on any issues or concerns that they may have relating to equity or Equal Employment Opportunity. For example, this may be information on leave due to family circumstances, impact of ethnicity or cultural background on leadership roles, etc.

(28) Sections of this material will be supplied by the Division of Human Resources. The applicant will be responsible for checking all supplied information and ensuring that it is true, current and accurate and that no information is missing (e.g. Special Studies Program, Research Centre Fellowships, and most recent negotiated workload).

(29) The Division of Human Resources will indicate whether the applicant meets the requirements for qualifications.

Qualifications or Equivalent Status

(30) In addition to relevant professional experience, applicants must demonstrate that they meet the minimum qualifications for appointment or promotion to the various levels of staff appointment:

  1. Level A - An honours degree or higher qualification; an extended professional degree; a postgraduate diploma appropriate to the relevant discipline area; or equivalent accreditation and standing;
  2. Level B - A doctoral or research masters qualification appropriate to the relevant discipline area or equivalent accreditation and standing;
  3. Level C - A doctoral qualification relevant to the discipline area; or equivalent accreditation and standing;
  4. Level D - A doctoral qualification relevant to the discipline area; or equivalent accreditation and standing;
  5. Level E - A doctoral qualification relevant to the discipline area; or equivalent accreditation and standing.

Establishing a Case for Equivalent Accreditation and Standing (where Necessary)

(31) It is essential that applicants who do not hold the relevant doctoral or masters qualifications explicitly make the case for equivalent accreditation and standing. Failure to do so will mean that their application will be unsuccessful.

(32) Whilst explicitly acknowledging the diversity that typifies its academic staff, the normal expectation at the University is that Teaching and Research staff will hold a research doctoral qualification (although an honours degree is acceptable at Level A and a research masters qualification is acceptable at Level B). However, it is entirely consistent with the University's mission to recognise professional practice-based achievement for the purpose of equivalence in career development. This is based on recognition that some disciplines require a combination of qualifications, experience and registration to achieve expert-level professional standards. Nonetheless, the usual route to higher levels of appointment (Levels D and E) will remain the holding of a doctoral qualification and achievements in influencing university, profession and/or community; promoting learning; and creating knowledge. An appropriate level of achievement is required across each of the domains aligned with each individual's appointment, as expanded in clauses 48-54 of this Procedure. For staff whose appointment type does not include a research work function, a level of achievement in research is not a mandatory requirement for promotion. The norm is that a member of the academic staff whose prime focus is teaching demonstrates that their contribution is underpinned by outstanding scholarship that must be linked to the nature of the individual's appointment.

(33) In deciding equivalent accreditation and standing:

  1. where an examining body, profession or similar institute admits a person to one of its awards or levels of membership such as Fellowship or Diplomate (typically by examination and research), and that award or level of membership is widely considered by universities and the profession to be equivalent to a particular level of University award, then the award or level of membership may be deemed to have equivalent standing to the particular University award for purposes of career development. Note: It is the responsibility of the applicant to provide details of the basis on which awards and membership have been determined, and the standing they confer within the relevant field;
  2. where a professional doctorate is equivalent to an Australian Qualifications Framework level 10 qualification, then it is deemed to have equivalent standing to the doctoral qualification for purposes of career development.

(34) In all other instances the following shall apply:

  1. for equivalent standing to a master's degree, an applicant will demonstrate:
    1. sustained achievement in professional development activities; and
    2. advanced knowledge and achievement across a significant portion of his/her field of expertise; or
    3. detailed knowledge and achievement in a particular part of his/her field.
  2. for equivalent standing to a doctoral degree, an applicant will demonstrate:
    1. sustained achievement in professional development activities; and
    2. broad knowledge and achievement across his/her field of expertise; and
    3. in-depth knowledge and achievement in a particular part of his/her field.

(35) Examples of evidence that are appropriate to demonstrate equivalent standing may include (but are not limited to) the following:

  1. teaching experience;
  2. experience in research and scholarship;
  3. experience outside tertiary education in industry, business or government employment;
  4. creative achievement;
  5. granting of accolades or awards indicative of professional reputation;
  6. professional contributions including professional qualifications and/or further education;
  7. training and professional development;
  8. technical achievement; and
  9. leadership in local, state or national advisory bodies and/or community organisations relevant to the discipline.
This list is neither prescriptive nor exhaustive. Evidence subsequently provided to support a case for promotion must be of a different nature and impact from the evidence used to substantiate equivalent standing.

(36) The option of demonstrating equivalence is normally restricted to those engaged in professional practice and where the current norm is not to hold a doctoral or master's qualification. In determining equivalent standing there is no distinction between appointment levels, i.e. the same standard for doctoral equivalence applies at Level C as at Level E.

(37) Note: It is not possible to set an absolute standard; there must be some flexibility. For example, there are a number of individuals who have excelled to the highest level of achievement without a doctoral qualification, including some Australian Nobel Laureates.

Application Part 2: Disciplinary Statement Providing Disciplinary Context including Expected Qualifications or Equivalence

(38) This statement is specific to the Charles Sturt University discipline of the applicant and will be developed in 2015 for implementation in 2016.

(39) The Disciplinary Statement is not a reference and is not designed to provide advocacy for an applicant but rather to provide the Promotion Committee with disciplinary context.

Application Part 3: Applicant's Statement of Case for Promotion

(40) This statement is to be completed by the applicant. The case should demonstrate a clear career trajectory: where did I begin, where have I been and where am I going, and how will this promotion get me there faster? What are my major achievements? These achievements must be linked to the evidence that supports their significance.

Application Part 4: Evidence Portfolio

(41) I. Influencing University, Profession and/or Community Domain: This information must be completed by the applicant.

(42) II. Promoting Learning Domain: Some information in this section will be supplied by the Division of Student Learning. These data must be supplemented by information provided by the applicant on the form.

(43) III. Creating Knowledge Domain: Some information in this section will be supplied by the Research Office. These data must be supplemented by information provided by the applicant on the form.

Application Part 5. Applicant Comments on Supplied Data (optional)

(44) This section provides the applicant with the opportunity to comment on any relevant issues in the supplied information such as concerns about comparisons to norms (i.e. contextualise). This should be done briefly.

(45) This section is not an opportunity to correct erroneous information. Where there are any inaccuracies or omissions in supplied information, the relevant section of the University must be informed (with provision of suitable evidence, where appropriate) at least two weeks prior to the advertised date for submission of applications to supervisors so that the information can be corrected.

Application Part 6: Standards

(46) Applicants must demonstrate how they currently meet the standards for academic promotion as specified by the University through their (a) commitment to the University's core values and strategies and (b) contributions to the domains of influencing university, profession and/or community; promoting learning; and creating knowledge (see the Academic Staff Promotion Guidelines for Applicants) in relation to the minimum standards for academic performance and academic reputation of the level to which they seek promotion.

University Core Values and Core Strategies

(47) One of the distinguishing features of academia traditionally has been adherence to a set of core values. These core values at the University can be identified from the University Strategy as:

  1. Collaborative - we believe we are at our best when we work together with others to achieve mutual goals.
  2. Student centred - we recognise that delivering an excellent student experience is central to our success. We listen to our students to understand their individual needs. We work to make a real difference in our students' lives.
  3. Agile - we recognise that our environment and the needs of our students, professions, communities and staff are constantly changing and we continually refine and adapt to these differing and changing needs.
  4. Agents of change - we think differently and look beyond the obvious. We ask 'why' and 'why not'. We constantly strive for new and better ways to achieve our goals. We make things happen.
  5. Reliable - we are consistent, trustworthy and dependable. We set realistic aspirational goals and we strive to achieve them.
  6. Inclusive - we recognise that we achieve better outcomes when we embrace and respect the different views, cultural backgrounds and abilities of all staff, students, graduates and external communities.

(48) All applicants for academic staff promotion at all levels must demonstrate a commitment to these core values and strategies.

Domains

(49) Applicants for promotion must demonstrate that they meet the appropriate standards (as specified below) for academic performance, academic reputation and academic leadership in the domains of influencing university, profession and/or community; promoting learning; and creating knowledge.

(50) Further assistance is provided in the Academic Staff Promotion Guidelines for Applicants and in The CSU Academic.

Academic Performance and Leadership

(51) The responsibilities of academic staff may vary according to the specific requirements of the University to meet its objectives, to different discipline requirements and/or to individual staff development. However, Charles Sturt University is committed to the Minimum Standards for Academic Levels. These minimum standards have been re-couched in terms of academic performance and academic reputation to provide more relevance and immediacy to career development processes at the University.

(52) An applicant for promotion must meet the minimum standards for academic performance as appropriate to the academic level to which they seek promotion.

Table A: Minimum Standards of Academic Performance and Leadership

Level A Work with the support and guidance from more senior academic staff and is expected to develop academic expertise with an increasing degree of autonomy normally contribute to academic activities at the University, at a level appropriate to the skills and experience of the staff member engage in academic activity appropriate to profession or discipline, whilst gaining increased autonomy, and undertake administration primarily relating to activities at the University contribution to teaching primarily at undergraduate and graduate diploma level.
Level B Undertake independent academic activity in discipline or related area in academic activity make an independent contribution through professional practice and expertise and coordinate and/or lead the activities of other staff, as appropriate to the discipline normally contribute to teaching at undergraduate, honours and postgraduate level engage in independent academic activities appropriate to profession or discipline with increasing independence and initiative. normally undertake administration primarily relating to activities at the university and may be required to perform the full academic responsibilities of and related administration for the coordination of an award program of the University.
Level C Make significant contribution to the discipline at the national level. in academic activities make original contributions, which expand knowledge or practice in the discipline normally make a significant contribution to academic activities of an organisational unit or an interdisciplinary area at undergraduate, honours and postgraduate level normally have responsibility for, and play a major role or provide a significant degree of leadership in academic activities relevant to the profession, discipline and/or community and may be required to perform the full academic responsibilities of and related administration for the coordination of a large award program or a number of smaller award programs of the university or functional unit such as a research team in a priority area, a significant research facility or a teaching facility.
Level D Undertake independent academic activity in discipline or related area in academic activity make an independent contribution through professional practice and expertise and coordinate and/or lead the activities of other staff, as appropriate to the discipline normally contribute to teaching at undergraduate, honours and postgraduate level engage in independent academic activities appropriate to profession or discipline with increasing independence and initiative. normally undertake administration primarily relating to activities at the university and may be required to perform the full academic responsibilities of and related administration for the coordination of an award program of the University.
Level E Provide strong leadership and foster excellence in their academic discipline within the University and within the community, professional, commercial or industrial sectors make original, innovative and distinguished contributions to scholarship, researching and teaching in the discipline make a commensurate contribution to the work of the University expected to be able to evidence a contribution to the inclusive development of staff as agreed with the individual's line manager.

Academic Reputation and Leadership

(53) An academic must meet certain requirements related to their academic standing as appropriate to the academic level. National or international standing is, by definition, gained through activities that command respect nationally or internationally. Examples of such activities are provided in The CSU Academic Evidence Guide.

Table B: Minimum Standards of Academic Reputation and Leadership

Level A Capacity to undertake, under supervision, teaching and/or research / creative works and/or professional activity; and the capacity to work as part of a team of academic staff.
Level B Record of research / creative works or professional activity relevant to the discipline area, which demonstrates a capacity to make an autonomous contribution.
Level C Record of significant achievement and outputs relevant to the discipline area, and at a national level.
Level D Record of academic achievement and outputs of national and/or international standing through outstanding contributions, including academic leadership.
Level E Record of academic achievement and outputs of national and international standing through distinguished contributions, including academic leadership recognition as an eminent authority in the discipline, and will be required to have achieved distinction at the national and international levels.

(54) Note that the minimum standards for academic performance and academic reputation at the different appointment levels are differentiated by:

  1. level of complexity;
  2. degree of autonomy;
  3. leadership requirements of the position; and,
  4. level of achievement of the academic.

(55) Note also that the minimum standards for each level assume that requirements for all lower levels are met.

Application Part 7: Curriculum Vitae

(56) Applicants must upload a current curriculum vitae.

Application Part 8: Supervisor Statement

(57) The applicant must submit the completed application by 31st July for the supervisor to complete his/her statement by 24 August.

(58) Where the applicant is a member of a Research Centre but the Centre Director is not the supervisor, there is provision for the Research Centre Directorto provide comment as part of the Supervisor's Report.

Nomination of Referees

(59) The University may obtain referees' reports for applicants seeking promotion to Level B where, in the view of a Academic Staff Promotion Committee, such reports may assist in determining the merits of an applicant.

(60) The University will require written referee reports for all applicants seeking promotion to Levels C, D and E.

(61) The supervisor of an applicant is responsible for providing the Division of Human Resources with the names and contact details of three individuals who have agreed to act as referee. (See the Academic Staff Promotion Guidelines for Supervisors, Committee Members and Administration, Part A).

(62) Individuals selected must be familiar with the applicant's academic and professional work and be able to comment authoritatively on the quality of the performance of the applicant.

(63) Applicants may indicate to their supervisor the names of up to four people who they do not wish to assess their application and the reasons why.

(64) Referees cannot be members of the Academic Staff Promotion Committee, the applicant's Executive Dean or other senior member of the University.

(65) As this is an important development process, the initial selection of referees must occur in consultation with the applicant and can also involve other University members of the applicant's academic discipline or cognate discipline. It is the responsibility of the applicant to declare any actual, potential or perceived conflict of interest or any personal or professional connection between the applicant and a suggested referee that may prejudice the independence of the referee. The applicant must not be informed of the supervisor's final selection of referees.

(66) With the exception of Level E, supervisors must nominate referees who hold an appointment higher than the level to which the applicant is seeking promotion.

(67) When nominating referees for applicants applying for promotion to Level B, at least one of the referees must be external to the University and preferably be acknowledged as a national or international authority in his/her discipline area.

(68) When selecting referees for applicants applying for promotion to Level C, a supervisor may nominate one referee internal to the University but all three referees must be of at least national standing in a relevant discipline.

(69) When selecting referees for applicants applying for promotion to Level D, referees must be of at least national standing in a relevant discipline. Referees internal to the University would be considered inappropriate unless of special standing.

(70) When selecting referees for applicants applying for promotion to Level E, referees must be of international standing in a relevant discipline. Referees internal to the University would be considered inappropriate.

(71) Former staff of Charles Sturt University are regarded as internal if they left the University's employment in the previous five years.

(72) The Division of Human Resources is responsible for contacting nominated referees to request the submission of signed referee reports. Referees must be supplied with a full copy of the application, including the Supervisor Statement plus the University's Academic Staff Promotion Policy, Procedure, Guidelines for Applicants and Guidelines for Supervisors, Committee Members and Administration, and access to all other relevant material (e.g. The CSU Academic).

(73) Reports are to be emailed directly to the Secretary, Academic Staff Promotion Committee, academicpromotions@csu.edu.au by 30 September.

Formatting the Application

(74) Applicants must observe the page lengths and formatting as set in the on-line application.

Submission of the Application

(75) The completed application is to be submitted to the applicant's supervisor and Research Centre Director (where appropriate) by 31st July. The supervisor (and Centre Director, if relevant) must complete the Supervisor Statement and return the application to the candidate by 24th August.

(76) The completed application for Academic Promotion, including Supervisor Statement, is to be received by the Division of Human Resources by 31st August. Late applications will not be accepted.

(77) Responsibility for compliance with all relevant policy and procedural issues remains with the applicant.

(78) The Division of Human Resources will advise the applicant that their submission has been received and to retain a record of this confirmation.

(79) Applicants may withdraw their application at any time prior to the convening of the relevant Academic Staff Promotion Committee.

(80) The Division of Human Resources will collate applications and referee reports for all applicants and distribute applications to the relevant Academic Staff Promotion Committee members. Executive Deans, who have the right of audience and debate at the University Professorial Promotion Committee, will be provided with a copy of the application and all other associated materials for applicants for promotion to Levels D and E.

Academic Staff Promotion Committees

(81) An Academic Staff Promotion Committee has one task - to use the evidence presented to it to determine suitability of an applicant for promotion. To achieve this task the committee must look objectively at the information presented in the application and supporting documentation (reports of the supervisor and referees) for evidence of sustained contributions at the levels claimed and measure performance against a set of pre-determined standards.

(82) There are two levels of Academic Staff Promotion Committees: the Faculty Academic Staff Promotion Committee and the University Professorial Promotion Committee.

Faculty Academic Staff Promotion Committee

(83) A committee will be established by each Faculty to meet annually face-to-face (where possible) to consider applications to Lecturer (Level B) and Senior Lecturer (Level C). Each Faculty Academic Staff Promotion Committee will have the following membership:

  1. relevant Executive Dean ex officio as Chair;
  2. Presiding Officer, Academic Senate ex officio;
  3. Pro Vice-Chancellor (Student Learning);
  4. four members of academic staff (from different Schoolswithin the Faculty but not necessarily representing all Schools), all of whom must hold a substantive appointment at Level C or above with two holding substantive appointments at Level D or E and all nominated and approved by the Executive Dean; at least two of these members must be research active; and
  5. two members of academic staff (each from outside the Faculty and from different Faculties) holding a substantive appointment at Level C or above nominated by the Executive Dean.

(84) In selecting nominated staff, the Chair of the committee must ensure the committee has as close to equal gender representation as reasonably practicable, with a minimum of one-third representation of each gender. Gender balance can be facilitated by the Executive Dean's selection of nominees. Careful consideration should be given in appointing nominees to cover the breadth of disciplinary expertise in the Faculty and the range of skills in research, scholarship, teaching and professional practice.

(85) If in exceptional circumstances there are no available individuals of the under-represented gender, the Executive Dean will notify the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) who will confirm the composition of the committee.

(86) Nominated staff cannot hold an appointment at Charles Sturt University as Executive Dean, Associate Dean or Head of School.

(87) Head of Schools have right of audience ONLY (but not debate) on all Faculty Academic Staff Promotion Committees. To facilitate feedback to applicants by the Executive Dean and relevant Head of School, it is an expectation that a Head of School will attend the commencement of the meeting and during discussions of applicants from their School.

(88) The recommendations of the Faculty Academic Staff Promotion Committee will be referred to the Executive Dean of Faculty for approval. In making a determination, the Executive Dean will not be bound by the recommendations of the Faculty Academic Staff Promotion Committee.

(89) Nominated internal members of Academic Staff Promotion Committees are to serve a two-year term with staggered rotation of one half of the nominated members to ensure continuity of committee membership.

University Professorial Promotion Committee

(90) This committee will be established by the Division of Human Resources to meet annually face-to-face to assess and recommend applications for promotion to Associate Professor (Level D) and Professor (Level E). The University Professorial Promotion Committee will have the following membership:

  1. Presiding Officer, Academic Senate ex officio;
  2. Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) ex officio as Chair;
  3. Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research, Development and Industry) ex officio;
  4. four members of academic staff holding a substantive appointment at Level E, chosen so that they cover each of the University's Faculties, nominated and approved by the Vice-Chancellor; at least two of these members must be research active; and
  5. up to three senior academics from another university nominated by the Vice-Chancellor.

(91) In selecting nominated staff, the Vice-Chancellor must ensure the committee has as close to equal gender representation as reasonably practicable, with a minimum of one-third representation of each gender. Gender balance can be facilitated by the Vice-Chancellor's selection of nominees. Careful consideration should be given in appointing nominees to cover breadth of disciplinary expertise in the University and the range of skills in research, scholarship, teaching and professional practice.

(92) If in exceptional circumstances there are no available individuals of the under-represented gender, the Vice-Chancellor will document the problem and include details in the report to Academic Senate.

(93) Nominated staff cannot hold an appointment at Charles Sturt University as Executive Dean, Associate Dean or Head of School.

(94) Executive Deans have automatic right of audience and debate on the University Professorial Promotion Committee for applicants from their Faculty only. Head of Schools will be given right of audience ONLY on a rotating basis to assist development of their competency and skills in this area.

(95) The recommendations of the University Professorial Promotion Committee will be referred to the Vice-Chancellor for approval. In making a determination, the Vice-Chancellor will not be bound by the recommendations of the University Professorial Promotion Committee.

(96) Nominated internal members of the University Professorial Promotion Committee are to serve a two-year term with staggered rotation of one half of the nominated members to ensure continuity of committee membership.

Training for Committee Members

(97) The Division of Human Resources is responsible for providing induction and training to all members of the Academic Staff Promotion Committees. For external members, this can be done by provision of an on-line information pack.

(98) Training is to include but not be limited to:

  1. aspects of the roles and responsibilities that are incurred as members of a Academic Staff Promotion Committee;
  2. statutory requirements involving equity and confidentiality;
  3. promotion procedures at the University, highlighting any differences to other institutions;
  4. conflict of interest;
  5. impact of disciplinary differences;
  6. collaboration and team work, multiple authorship and differences between publishing protocols;
  7. citation indices, impact factors and benchmarking data; and
  8. different ways, both quantitative and qualitative, of assessing the range of academic activities referred to as domains and dimensions.

(99) In the case of a conflict of interest being identified by a member of a Academic Staff Promotion Committee, this must be notified to the Presiding Officer of the relevant Academic Staff Promotion Committee who will investigate and take the necessary action; if time permits this may include a replacement committee member for the consideration of that application or exclusion of the member from the meeting during consideration of that application.

Committee Procedure

(100) A Human Resources Director will attend the Faculty Academic Staff Promotion Committees and the University Professorial Promotion Committee. The role of the Director is to provide expert advice to the committee, with particular attention to adherence to the Academic Staff Promotion Policy and Procedure, issues of fairness and equity, and any people management implications.

(101) The Presiding Officer of each Academic Staff Promotion Committee is responsible for ensuring that the committee:

  1. meets face-to-face in the case of the University Professorial Promotion Committee and face-to-face where possible in the case of Faculty Academic Staff Promotion Committees;
  2. is properly constituted, including compliance with gender requirements, in accordance with clauses 83 and 90 of this Procedure; and
  3. consistently applies fair and proper procedures to the consideration of each application. During the committee discussions, matters of opinion must be substantiated and any comments or questions should relate specifically to the established standards specified in The CSU Academic.

(102) At the commencement of the meeting, the Presiding Officer will:

  1. confirm matters relating to record keeping for the meeting to ensure that clear records are kept of the committee's discussions in order to provide feedback to both successful and unsuccessful applicants
  2. confirm the need to maintain confidentiality regarding the committee's proceedings;
  3. brief the committee on its role, and processes;
  4. discuss with the committee the standards defined by The CSU Academic for the different academic levels to ensure that the committee operates with a shared understanding; and
  5. confirm the committee's understanding of Equal Employment Opportunity principles in relation to promotion. Equal Employment Opportunity means that employment policies and practices must be based on the principle of merit. Therefore, applications for promotion must be considered on the basis of the applicant's merit, unbiased by personal opinion or prejudice; and
  6. establish an order of proceedings. Matters that must be addressed are the sequence in which applications will be reviewed and the rules governing the order in which committee members will speak to each application. The Presiding Officer will select a minimum of three committee members to speak to each application.

(103) Anti-discrimination legislation must be followed. The New South Wales and Commonwealth Acts, as listed below, cover discrimination in employment, education and other areas on the grounds of sex (including sexual harassment and pregnancy), race (including colour, ethnicity, descent, ethno-religious identity, national identity and background), marital status, disability, homosexuality, age, transgender status, and carers' responsibilities (employment).

  1. Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cth)
  2. Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth)
  3. Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth)
  4. Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012 (Cth)
  5. Age Discrimination Act 2004 (Cth)
  6. Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 (NSW)

(104) The Academic Staff Promotion Committees will review the supervisor's and referees' reports for all applicants seeking promotion to Levels C, D and E, and may seek to obtain referee reports for applicants seeking promotion to Level B where, in the view of a Academic Staff Promotion Committee, such reports may assist in determining the merits of an applicant.

(105) As well as the referees nominated by the supervisor, the Academic Staff Promotion Committees may seek the opinions of additional referees within the applicant's particular discipline.

(106) A Faculty Academic Staff Promotion Committee may delegate some members of the committee to meet with an applicant in order to seek clarification of matters in the application.

Interviews and Presentations

(107) Applicants for promotion to Lecturer (Level B) and Senior Lecturer (Level C) will not be required to meet with the Academic Staff Promotion Committee. However, they will be asked to provide a contact phone number as part of their application and to be available at the time the committee meets should the committee require clarification of aspects of their application.

(108) The University Professorial Promotion Committee will invite applicants to make a presentation to the committee at a scheduled time during the meeting. Presentations are to be of no more than 15 minutes' duration and to address the applicant's prospective contribution to their field and the University (see the Academic Staff Promotion Guidelines for Supervisors, Committee Members and Administration, Part C). Following the presentation, the committee will discuss the presentation with the applicant for a further 10 minutes. Applicants are asked to use standard fonts in their PowerPoint presentations.

Committee Recommendations regarding Promotion

(109) An application for promotion will be assessed against the evidence provided through:

  1. the detailed record of the academic achievements of the applicant (what the applicant has done, the outcomes relative to standards for the relevant level of appointment, impact of the outcomes and supporting evidence), addressing the characteristics specified by The CSU Academic;
  2. a statement(s) by the supervisor and Centre Director (if relevant);
  3. the response of the applicant to the Supervisor Statement(s) (optional);
  4. independent referee reports;
  5. reports of additional referees, if required; and
  6. with the addition, in the case of applicants for promotion to Level D and Level E, of a seminar presentation.

(110) In making a decision, a committee member must also consider the performance trajectory of the applicant over time. The committee is interested in the total case for promotion and not the attainment of performance metrics alone. Thus, the committee will consider the quality and impact of achievements and the national/international standing of the applicant where appropriate, using the evidence supplied by the applicant and any reports from the supervisor and referees, not merely the achievement of quantitative thresholds.

(111) Prior to the meeting of the relevant Academic Staff Promotion Committee, each member of the committee is to assess all applications using the on-line template supplied by the Division of Human Resources.

(112) The completed form on each application is to be submitted by committee members to the Division of Human Resources three working days prior to the scheduled meeting of the relevant Academic Staff Promotion Committee. The Division will make the collated data for each criteria across all committee members available at the meeting of the Academic Staff Promotion Committee.

(113) All Academic Staff Promotion Committees will discuss each candidate's application.

(114) At the completion of all debate for an individual applicant, the Presiding Officer of the Academic Staff Promotion Committee will organise for a vote to be taken by ballot of all members of the committee eligible to vote.

(115) All decisions must be based on the merits of the application against the relevant standards contained in The CSU Academic. The final recommendation of each committee member will be informed by the individual assessments BUT the final decision must be determined holistically with due consideration of the presentation by the applicant (where relevant) and by the debate of the Academic Staff Promotion Committee and not simply by an average of the individual assessments.

(116) The advice to be provided by a Academic Staff Promotion Committee's to the Presiding Officer on individual applications is to be determined by a ballot of voting members.

(117) A committee decision to support promotion of an applicant will require a majority vote of 65% of the number of committee members eligible to vote (rounded up to the nearest whole number). In cases where the vote in favour of promotion falls short of the required 65% but exceeds 50%, the applicant should be given the opportunity to submit a new application the following year. This condition does not preclude this consideration from being extended to other applicants.

(118) All Academic Staff Promotion Committees will make a recommendation for or against promotion on each application, using the approved form, to the Presiding Officer of the Academic Staff Promotion Committee.

(119) Note: All documentation used in Academic Staff Promotion Committees will be collected and returned to the Secretary, Academic Staff Promotion Committees at the end of the committee meetings and retained in accordance with legislative requirements.

(120) The relevant Presiding Officer or the Vice-Chancellor (in the case of the University Professorial Promotion Committee) will make known their determinations within three working days of receiving the recommendations of the Academic Staff Promotion Committee.

(121) The Executive Director, Human Resources or nominee will phone each applicant and provide notification in writing of the outcome of the application within two working days of receipt of determinations from the Presiding Officer or Vice-Chancellor (see the Academic Staff Promotion Guidelines for Supervisors, Committee Members and Administration, Part C).

Effective Date of Promotion

(122) Academic promotion will take effect from the first pay period commencing on or after 1st February of the following year. This includes change to a successful applicant's title to Lecturer (Level B), Senior Lecturer (Level C), Associate Professor (Level D) or Professor (Level E).

Feedback

(123) The supervisor and the supervisor's line manager (usually the Head of School and Executive Dean of Faculty) are responsible for collectively providing formal constructive feedback (either face-to-face or by videoconference), within 20 working days, to each successful and unsuccessful applicant for promotion to Academic Levels B and C about their application.

(124) The Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) and/or Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research, Development and Industry) together with the Executive Dean of Faculty are responsible for providing formal constructive feedback (either face-to-face or by videoconference), within 20 working days, to each successful and unsuccessful applicant for promotion to Academic Levels D and E about their application.

(125) All feedback provided to applicants will focus on information collected during the committee's deliberations.

(126) Unsuccessful applicants will be advised whether the level of attainment did not meet the standards for the level sought and/or whether the evidence supporting the achievement was insufficient and of:

  1. the area(s) of academic activity in which the committee believed there were insufficient data to support the promotion;
  2. strengths against the characteristics set out in The CSU Academic Evidence Guide; and
  3. areas in need of improvement and suggestions for future development if the Executive Dean recommends they apply for promotion the following year.

(127) After completion of the feedback session, the applicant (successful and unsuccessful) must notify the Division of Human Resources that official feedback has been provided and that they understand that this feedback forms part of their career development rather than a prescriptive list of future requirements. Future career development processes such as the Employee Development and Review Scheme will not be deemed as satisfactory until this is completed.

Appeals

(128) An employee may only appeal on the grounds that a breach of fair and proper procedures was committed, which materially and adversely affected a decision about promotion. An appeal cannot be lodged against a decision relating to the academic merit of the employee's application for promotion.

(129) "Fair and proper procedures" means that:

  1. the appellant's application for promotion was made available to all members of the Academic Staff Promotion Committee;
  2. all members of the Academic Staff Promotion Committee were given the opportunity to comment on, and contribute to, the assessment of the appellant's application for promotion; and
  3. the appellant's application for promotion was considered against the criteria in the Academic Staff Promotion Policy.

(130) It is not grounds for appeal that a Academic Staff Promotion Committee did not:

  1. keep a record of its discussions or interview the appellant. It is sufficient that a Academic Staff Promotion Committee kept a record of the meeting, including its membership, the vote taken and its recommendations;
  2. include a member from the appellant's discipline; or
  3. examine documentation and material presented by the appellant, additional to that required in the Academic Staff Promotion Committee.

Appeal submission

(131) An unsuccessful applicant has 10 working days from the date of receipt of formal notification in writing within which to lodge an appeal in writing to the Secretary, Academic Staff Promotion Committees (Secretary, ASPC), for determination by the Vice-Chancellor.

(132) In lodging an appeal, the employee must provide prima facie evidence to substantiate the ground(s) on which the appeal is made.

(133) Where, in the opinion of the Vice-Chancellor, such evidence has not been provided, the appeal shall not proceed and the employee shall be promptly advised of this in writing.

(134) Where, in the opinion of the Vice-Chancellor, such evidence has been provided, the Vice-Chancellor will hear and determine the appeal within 10 working days of receipt of the appellant's evidence.

Determination of the appeal

(135) The Vice-Chancellor's terms of reference are to determine:

  1. whether a Academic Staff Promotion Committee committed a breach in respect to the ground(s) for appeal specified in clause 130 of this Procedure; and
  2. if a breach was committed by a Academic Staff Promotion Committee, whether that breach may have significantly and detrimentally affected a decision on the appellant's application for promotion.

(136) The Vice-Chancellor is not empowered to review or decide the academic merit of an appellant's application for promotion.

(137) The Vice-Chancellor may seek additional information relevant to its terms of reference, but shall not take into account additional or new material supplementing the original application for promotion.

(138) After considering an appeal against the procedures of a Academic Staff Promotion Committee, the Vice-Chancellor shall either reject or uphold the appeal. His/her decision shall be final and not subject to review or change.

(139) The Vice-Chancellor shall provide the appellant with a report setting out his/her decision and reasons for the decision.

Reconsideration of an application

(140) Where the Vice-Chancellor upholds an appeal, the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) or relevant Executive Dean shall reconvene the relevant Academic Staff Promotion Committee to reconsider the appellant's application for promotion within 10 working days of his/her receipt of the Vice-Chancellor's report.

(141) Following reconsideration of the appellant's application for promotion by the reconvened committee, the Presiding Officer shall submit a report to the Vice-Chancellor, setting out the committee's recommendation and the reason(s) for the recommendation.

(142) The decision of the Vice-Chancellor, on the recommendation of the reconvened committee, shall be final and the University Secretary shall promptly advise the applicant in writing of the Vice-Chancellor's decision concerning the appeal.

Extraordinary Promotion Committees

(143) To assist the University in achieving its key objectives, and to retain high quality academic staff who are continuing to make an outstanding and exceptional contribution to the University's mission, nothing in this Procedure shall prevent the establishment of an ad hoc Extraordinary Academic Staff Promotion Committee outside the normal annual round of promotions to make a recommendation on the promotion of an academic staff member.

(144) Written submissions to establish an Extraordinary Academic Staff Promotion Committee may be made to the Vice-Chancellor by the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) on the advice of the relevant Executive Dean or Centre Director. Following consideration of such a submission, the Vice-Chancellor may decide to establish an Extraordinary Academic Staff Promotion Committee.

(145) The membership of an Extraordinary Academic Staff Promotion Committee established to consider a submission to promote an employee to level B or level C will comprise:

  1. Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) - Presiding Officer, ex officio;
  2. Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research, Development and Industry) ex officio;
  3. Presiding Officer, Academic Senate ex officio;
  4. one of the level E employees, nominated by the Vice-Chancellor in the immediately preceding annual round of promotions. The appointment of this member will be at the discretion of the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic); and
  5. up to three members of the professoriate nominated by the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) who are external to the relevant Faculty and who have previously served as a member of a University Professorial Promotion Committee.

(146) The membership of an Extraordinary Academic Staff Promotion Committee established to consider a submission to promote an employee to Level D or E will comprise:

  1. Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) - Presiding Officer, ex officio;
  2. Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research, Development and Industry) ex officio;
  3. Presiding Officer, Academic Senate ex officio;
  4. one of the level E employees, nominated by the Vice-Chancellor in the immediately preceding annual round of promotions. The appointment of this member will be at the discretion of the Vice-Chancellor; and
  5. up to three persons external to the University, nominated by the Vice-Chancellor.

(147) Every effort shall be made to achieve gender balance and diversity of membership on Extraordinary Academic Staff Promotion Committees. As a minimum, an Extraordinary Academic Staff Promotion Committee will normally have in its membership at least one male and one female.

(148) The Executive Dean of the applicant's Faculty will be invited to address the committee about the submission.

(149) A Director of the Division of Human Resources will attend Extraordinary Academic Staff Promotion Committees.

(150) The material to be considered by Extraordinary Academic Staff Promotion Committees, and the procedures of those committees, will be similar to the material considered and procedures adopted by the other applicable Academic Staff Promotion Committees established under the provisions of this Procedure.

(151) The Presiding Officers may approve the recommendations of the Extraordinary Academic Staff Promotion Committees and, where applicable, report such decisions to the University Council. The Presiding Officers shall not be bound by the recommendations of an Extraordinary Academic Staff Promotion Committee.

(152) The circumstances and outcomes of the Extraordinary Academic Staff Promotion Committees will be reported annually to Academic Senate by the Vice-Chancellor at the time of the annual Promotions Report.

Top of Page

Section 5 - Guidelines

(153) Refer to:

  1. Academic Staff Promotion Guidelines for Applicants; and
  2. Academic Staff Promotion Guidelines for Supervisors, Committee Members and Administration.