Promotions Procedure

(Academic Staff and Titleholders)

Related Policy

Performance Development and Promotion Policy

Purpose

This procedure details all aspects of the academic promotions process for academic staff and titleholders. The University's academic promotions procedure enables evidenced and consistent outstanding achievement and performance to be recognised and rewarded through the application of clear standards and transparent, fair and equitable processes.

This procedure is to be read subject to the University of Adelaide Enterprise Agreement (as amended).

Scope

This procedure applies to academic staff, titleholders and third parties (such as external members of the Vice Chancellor's Professorial Committee) involved in the academic staff promotions process.

Exclusions:

This procedure does not apply to:

* Professional staff

* Titleholders who hold a Visiting title (under the Conferral of Honorary Roles Policy and Guidelines)

* Short-term academic visitors

* Casual staff

Definitions: for definitions that relate to this procedure see clause 22

1. Eligibility

1.1. Academic staff members are eligible to apply for promotion when they believe they have achieved and can demonstrate a quality of performance appropriate to the level sought.

1.2. Only Academic Titleholders applying for promotion to Level E may apply for promotion using this Promotions Procedure. Refer to clause 21

1.3. Research Only academics are eligible to nominate as a Research -focussed academic under the Promotions Procedure or apply as a Special Case under the Enterprise Agreement (as amended).

1.4. Promotion will only be recommended when an applicant has satisfactorily fulfilled the conditions of their present appointment and, through their achievements, can demonstrate that:

1.4.1. activities are performed at a level appropriate to that expected of staff at the academic level sought; and

1.4.2. the quality of current academic performance is also appropriate to the academic level sought.

1.5. Where an appointment is funded from an external source, agreement and confirmation from the funding body and/or the Faculty may be required prior to consideration of the application for promotion.

2. Coordination and Management of the Promotions Process

Responsibility: Human Resources Branch

2.1. Promotion Schedule

2.1.1. Applications for promotion will be considered annually and are effective from 1 January of the following year. The call for applications is generally scheduled as follows:

2.1.1.1. late April early May for Levels B and C;

2.1.1.2. early June for Level D;

2.1.1.3. mid July for Level E;

For promotions outside this promotions schedule refer to clause 20: Out of rounds academic promotions.

2.2. Staff notification of a call for applications

2.2.1 A call for applications for academic promotion will be issued by the Director, Human Resources on instruction from the Vice-Chancellor and President. The communication channels used to call for applications may include but are not restricted to:

2.2.1.1 electronic communication to staff;

2.2.1.2 email to Heads of School;

2.2.1.3 Human Resources Branch website.

3. Application Overview

Responsibility: Applicant

3.1. An applicant must describe and present evidence of their achievements against each relevant category of activity specified in the Enterprise Agreement (as amended), and the requisite duties, skills and criteria outlined in the Schedule to the Enterprise Agreement.

Refer Enterprise Agreement clause 5.3: Academic Promotion and Schedule 7, Classification Standards (Academic and Research Only Staff) (as amended)

The categories are:

3.1.1. Teaching (and related duties) including supervision;

3.1.2. Research scholarship and creative activity;

3.1.3. Administration, service and leadership in the University; and

3.1.4. Professional activity including service to the community.

The duties, skills and criteria are outlined in Schedule 7 of the Enterprise Agreement (as amended) and detail what is normally expected for promotion to each academic and research only classification level.

3.2 Applicants (excluding Research Only academic staff members applying as a Special Case under the Enterprise Agreement) are required to address the categories relevant to the promotion level sought and assign a weight to each category within a defined range, based on their academic focus area (refer to clause 4, Assigning Weightings). Weightings give academic staff members the opportunity to specify the relative emphasis to be placed on duties they undertake in keeping with their personal assessment of the overall effectiveness and impact of their scholarly work and the contribution they make at the promotion level being sought.

3.3 Academic promotions committee members will score applicants without knowledge of the weightings assigned by the applicant.

3.4 Application Format

3.4.1 Applications must meet the specifications in this clause to be considered for promotion.

3.4.2 An application will consist of the Academic Promotion Application Form, together with the Weightings Nomination Form plus supporting evidence. The supporting evidence must be in the format set out in the application form.

3.5 Application content

3.5.1 The supporting evidence must include, within a 25 page limit:

3.5.1.1 an up-to-date curriculum vitae of no more than 6 pages

3.5.1.2 commentary on achievements over the last 5 years (4 page limit). Where achievement was interrupted during the previous 5 years due to extended illness, maternity/parental leave, caring responsibilities (or other extenuating circumstance at the discretion of the Deputy Vice-Chancellor & Vice President (Academic)), an applicant may request special consideration to extend the time span of 5 years. (See clause 5, Special Consideration).

The commentary allows the applicant to:

* comment on the work which represents their best contribution in each of the categories applicable to their application consistent with the Promotion Criteria documented in the Enterprise Agreement

* indicate the relative significance and balance of achievements in relation to each category of activity

3.5.1.3 evidence of achievements over the last 5 years (15 page limit). Where achievement was interrupted during the previous 5 years due to extended illness, maternity/parental leave, caring responsibilities (or other extenuating circumstance at the discretion of the Deputy Vice-Chancellor & Vice President (Academic)), an applicant may request special consideration to extend the time span of 5 years. (See clause 5, Special Consideration).

The evidence must include:

* evaluation of teaching evidenced by the Student Evaluation of Learning and Teaching scores (SELTs) ,excluding student comments, or other quantified assessment for two semesters within the last three years including comments on how SELTs have contributed to changes in their teaching practice;

* a teaching portfolio of up to 6 pages - applicants must not include raw data;

* a publications list, including the leading author, page numbers and the percentage reflecting the applicant's contribution (only those that have been accepted for publication or published are to be included);

* where available and appropriate, the Excellence in Research for Australia Initiative (ERA) ranking or other evidence of the critical and judicious review of scholarly work for the publications and conferences referred to in the publications list;

* grant funding achievements, including funding source, amount awarded and year/s applicable, and whether the applicant is a first named Chief Investigator/ Principal Investigator or Co-Investigator for each award.

* the number of PhD students supervised and if each student has completed their doctorate.

The evidence of achievement may include other examples or indicators of relevant achievement.

Responsibility: Head of School

3.6 The Head of School is responsible for discussing with the applicant the weightings chosen by the applicant and noting, for the applicant, the degree to which they are a reasonable reflection of the quality and focus of duties undertaken.

4. Assigning Weightings

4

4.1 Weightings give academic staff members the opportunity to specify the relative emphasis to be placed on the duties they undertake in keeping with their personal assessment of the overall effectiveness and impact of their scholarly work and the contribution they make at the promotion level being sought.

Responsibility: Applicant

4.2 In nominating weightings, applicants should take care to realistically consider their areas of strength. This should include at a minimum a discussion with the Head of School, although responsibility for the weightings assigned rests with the applicant.

4.3 Weightings need not be aligned with any workload allocation model that has been agreed with the Head of School (pursuant to the Enterprise Agreement, as amended), but may be at the applicant's discretion.

4.4 Research Only staff members applying for promotion as a Special Case under the Enterprise Agreement do not assign weightings to their application.

4.5 Weightings relative to academic focus area:

4.5.1 Applicants for promotion to Levels B and C must address both the categories of Teaching (and related duties) including supervision and Research, scholarship and creative activity plus one of the categories of Administration, service and leadership in the University or Professional activity including service to the community

4.5.2 Applicants for promotion to Levels D and E must address each of the four categories.

4.5.3 Applicants requesting special consideration under this Promotions Procedure (see clause 5) must address one of the categories of Teaching (and related duties) including supervision and Research, scholarship and creative activity plus one of the categories of Administration, service and leadership in the University or Professional activity including service to the community

4.5.4 Research Only staff members applying as a Special Case under the Enterprise agreement must address the category of Research, scholarship and creative activity plus one other category or activity.

4.5.5 All applicants (except Research Only staff members applying for promotion under the Enterprise Agreement) must assign weightings to each relevant category consistent with their academic focus area. The weightings across the relevant number of categories must cumulatively equal 100% within the specified range as follows:

Teaching (and related duties) including supervision

Research, scholarship and creative activity

Administration service and leadership in the University

Professional activity including service to the community

General Academic

Maximum 55%

Minimum 25%

Maximum 55%

Minimum 25%

Maximum 40%

Minimum 10%

Maximum 40%

Minimum 10%

Research Focussed

Maximum 20%

Minimum 5%

Maximum 75%

Minimum 70%

Maximum 20%

Minimum 5%

Maximum 20%

Minimum 5%

Teaching Focussed

Maximum 75%

Minimum 70%

Maximum 20%

Minimum 5%

Maximum 20%

Minimum 5%

Maximum 20%

Minimum 5%

Special Consideration

Maximum 70%

Minimum 0%

Maximum 70%

Minimum 0%

Maximum 30%

Minimum 0%

Maximum 30%

Minimum 0%

5. Special Consideration and Research Only Academics Applying as a Special Case

Responsibility: Applicant

5.1. All staff members working less than full-time and/or whose academic career has been interrupted or impeded due to extended illness, maternity/parental leave, caring responsibilities (or other extenuating circumstances at the discretion of the Deputy Vice-Chancellor & Vice-President (Academic)) may choose to have the 5 year time span referred to in clause 3.5.1 extended on a 1:1 ratio for each career interruption.

5.2. An applicant applying for special consideration or a Research Only staff member applying as a special case must state their case (no more than 1 page) to enable the Promotions Committee to fully understand the context in which the application is submitted. This submission is to be attached to the application coversheet (not included in the 25 page limit).

5.3. Where special consideration is given, the promotions committee will consider the overall quality and impact of contributions demonstrated through current achievements against the weighted promotion categories.

5

5.2

5.3

5.4 An academic appointed to a Research Only position applying for promotion may choose to apply for promotion as a Special Case under the Enterprise Agreement or make an application for special consideration under this clause.

Refer: Enterprise Agreement: Applying as a Special Case: clause 5.3.2c) i) (as amended)

6. Supporting Reports

6

Responsibility: Applicant

6.1 All applicants seeking academic promotion are required to obtain a Head of School Report. The Head of School will be required to comment on the academic achievements of the applicant across each of the relevant categories using the Head of School Report Template.

6.2 In addition to a Head of School Report, applicants seeking promotion to Level B are required to provide a report sourced from a referee who may be either internal or external to the University of Adelaide.

6.3 In addition to a Head of School Report, applicants seeking promotion to Level C are required to provide a report sourced from a referee who must be external to the University of Adelaide.

6.4 Applicants are encouraged to source a referee who has the ability to comment on the majority of relevant categories and in particular those categories given the heaviest weighting by the applicant.

7 Head of School Report

Responsibility: Applicant

7.1 An applicant is responsible for ensuring that a copy of their application is given to their Head of School in enough time (and not less than two weeks prior to the application closing date) for the Head of School to prepare a report by the specified due date.

7.2 On receipt of the Head of School report the applicant is responsible for forwarding the report to HR with their application for promotion.

7.3 There may be circumstances when it is appropriate to use a previous Head of School or a Discipline Head to provide the Head of School report, e.g. a recent appointment of Head of School or in situations of perceived or actual conflict of interest between the applicant and the Head of School.

7.4 An applicant requesting permission to obtain a report from an alternate to the current Head of School must submit their request in writing to the Convener of the Promotions Committee for the approval of the Deputy Vice-Chancellor & Vice-President (Academic). The request should include the following:

7.4.1 A brief explanation of the reason for the request

7.4.2 The contact details of an appropriate Head of School substitute to comment on academic achievement across the relevant categories consistent with clause 3.1 of this procedure: Application Overview

Responsibility: Head of School

7.5 The Head of School will prepare the report using the Head of School Report Template and forward the completed report to the applicant.

8 Referee Report

Responsibility: Applicant

8.1 Applicants applying for promotion to Level B or C are responsible for ensuring that a Referee Report Template is forwarded to their referee to be completed and returned to the applicant who is responsible for forwarding it with their application to HR by the specified due date.

8.2 The Referee Report Template provided by the applicant will be accompanied by the following:

8.2.1 A pro forma Referee Letter from the applicant, requesting the referee report

8.2.2 The full Academic Promotions application of no more than 25 pages (provided by the applicant)

9 Assessor Reports

9.1 In the case of applications for promotion to Level D and Level E, comments on the application for promotion will be obtained from two external assessors.

Responsibility: Executive Dean

9.2 The applicant's Executive Dean is responsible for nominating two appropriate assessors to assess the applicant's work. The Executive Dean may consult with Discipline Heads or Heads of Schools to make this nomination.

9.3 To ensure confidence in the independence of assessor reports, assessors will not be selected from School colleagues or recent collaborators wherever possible.

Responsibility: Applicant

9.4 In their application an applicant may list no more than two people who they believe are not appropriate to assess their work, providing their reasons for this in no more than one page. The reasons provided will be taken into consideration by the Convenor of the Promotions Committee.

9.5 Assessors are required to complete an Assessor's Report using the Assessor's Report Template.

10 Academic Promotions Committees - composition and responsibilities

10.1 Promotion to Levels B and C: Faculty Promotions Committee

Responsibility: Faculty Promotions Committee

10.1.1 The academic promotions process for considering applications for promotion to Level B and C will be equitable and transparent to ensure that a fair and objective decision is reached.

10.1.2 Terms of reference:

The committee will assess an applicant's;

* expertise in their discipline

* achievements against the University standard for the Level sought and based on the evidence presented.

10.1.3 Composition of the Committee

The Executive Dean (or delegate) will convene the Faculty Promotions Committee which will comprise a minimum of four members. Committee members will be at Level C or above and may, at the discretion of the Executive Dean (or delegate) include members from another Faculty. Committee members will have sufficient knowledge of:

* the discipline

* promotion criteria and the Level to which promotion is being sought,

* assessment methods that facilitate fair and objective assessment of the merit of applications.

Responsibility: Executive Dean

10.1.4 The Executive Dean approves promotion to Level B and C

10.1.5 The Executive Dean (or delegate) advises the applicant of the outcome of the promotions process for applications for promotion to Levels B and C

10.2 Promotion to Level D: University Promotions Committee

Responsibility: University Promotions Committee

10.2.1 The academic promotions process for considering applications for promotion to Level D will be equitable and transparent to ensure that a fair and objective decision is reached.

10.2.2 Terms of Reference

a) The Committee undertaking the assessment should decide whether the application meets the criteria for promotion to Level D and ensure that standards are consistently applied.

b) The recommendation will be based on the evidence presented.

10.2.3 Composition of the University Promotions Committee will be as follows:

a) Deputy Vice-Chancellor and Vice-President (Academic) as Convenor

b) Deputy Vice-Chancellor and Vice-President (Research)

c) Executive Dean or Level E delegate from each faculty

d) Chair Academic Board

The Committee will recommend to the Vice-Chancellor those applicants whom it considers should be promoted.

Responsibility: Vice-Chancellor and President

10.2.4 On receiving the recommendation for promotion from the University Promotions Committee the Vice Chancellor may approve the promotion.

10.2.5 The Vice-Chancellor advises the applicant for promotion to Level D of the outcome of the promotion process

10.3 Promotion to Level E: Vice-Chancellor's Professorial Promotions Committee

Responsibility: Vice-Chancellor's Professorial Promotions Committee

10.3.1 Terms of Reference

a) The Committee undertaking the assessment should decide whether the application meets the criteria for promotion to Level E including a requirement that the applicant is able to demonstrate an international reputation in research and ensure that standards are consistently applied.

b) The recommendation should be based on the evidence presented.

c) The process used will be equitable and transparent to ensure that a fair and objective decision is reached.

d) The Committee will consider all applications for Level E together with the advice received from the Executive Deans.

10.3.2 Composition of the Vice-Chancellor's Professorial Promotions Committee will be as follows:

a) Vice-Chancellor and President (Convenor)

b) Deputy Vice-Chancellor and Vice-President (Academic)

c) Deputy Vice-Chancellor and Vice-President (Research)

d) Chair Academic Board

e) Executive Deans

f) One external member

10.3.3 The Committee may decide to interview applicants and/or request that the applicants deliver a presentation as determined by the Committee.

10.3.4 The Committee will recommend to the Vice-Chancellor those applicants whom it considers should be promoted.

Responsibility: Vice-Chancellor and President

10.3.5 On receiving the recommendation for promotion from the Vice Chancellor's Professorial Promotions Committee the Vice Chancellor may approve the promotion.

10.3.6 The Vice-Chancellor advises the applicant for promotion to Level E of the outcome of the promotions process

11 Promotions Committees - evaluation and scoring

Responsibility: All Promotions Committees

11.1 Evaluation of evidence of performance in areas of academic activity

11.1.1 Independent evidence and assessment of achievements provided by the applicant will be gained from relevant sources, including the Head of School Report, referee reports (Level B & C only), assessor reports (Level D & E only), expert comment on research or scholarship, SELTs or other quantified assessment. In addition, applicants seeking promotion to Level E may be required to undergo further evaluation through an interview and/or presentation at the discretion of the Vice-Chancellor.

11.1.2 Applications made by Research Only academics as a Special Case under the Enterprise Agreement must demonstrate a significantly higher level of productivity in the research category than is expected for peers who have both teaching and research responsibilities.

11.2 Decision making - individual committee members

Responsibility: Committee Members

11.2.1 Committee members will review the application for promotion against the criteria for the academic level to which promotion is being sought as documented in Schedule 7 of the Enterprise Agreement (as amended).

11.2.2 Committee members will assign a score between 1 and 10 for each applicant against each of the relevant promotion categories, to indicate the merit of the case for promotion.

11.2.3 The score assigned will be informed by the following five step grading system:

9 -10 Compelling case for promotion

7 - 8 Evidence of strength, providing a worthy case for consideration

5 - 6 Evidence of strength in a number of areas but not sufficient to achieve promotion

3 - 4 Insufficient case at the point in time

1 - 2 Weak case for promotion, falling well short of what is required

11.2.4 Committee members will enter the scores in whole numbers for each individual applicant onto a spreadsheet and provide this to the HR Branch for documenting and recording.

11.3 Decision making - Research Only Academics Applying as a Special Case

Responsibility: Promotions Committee

11.3.1 In assessing an application for promotion by a Research Only academic applying as a Special Case under the Enterprise Agreement, the Committee should ensure that the applicant demonstrates a significantly higher level of productivity in the Research category than is expected for peers who have both teaching and research responsibilities.

11.3.2 An applicant applying under the Enterprise Agreement as a Special Case should only be recommended for promotion if the Committee scores the applicant an overall score of 9 or above in the category of Research scholarship and creative activity and a score of 8 or above in one other category.

11.4 Decision making - Applications for Promotion (except Research Only Academics applying as a Special Case )

Responsibility: Promotions Committee

11.4.1 Committee members will make their decision without knowledge of the weightings assigned by applicants.

11.4.2 After individually scoring the applicants, without knowledge of the weightings assigned to them, the promotions committee members will refer the scores to HR for the weightings formula to be applied. The weightings formula will not be applied to the score of Research Only academics applying as a Special Case under the Enterprise Agreement.

Responsibility: Human Resources Branch

11.4.3 For all applicants (other than Research Only academics applying as a Special Case under the Enterprise Agreement) HR is responsible for applying the weightings formula to the scores assigned to each applicant by individual committee members and will document these scores for consideration by the Committee.

Responsibility: Promotions Committee

11.4.4 The Committee will meet to view the range of scores for individual applicants that make up the average score in the categories of:

a) teaching (and related duties) including supervision,

b) research, scholarship and creative activity;

c) administration, service and leadership in the University; and

d) professional activity including service to the community

11.4.5 The committee members may review the scores and take any reasonable steps, including moderation, to assure themselves that there is consistency, demonstrated by a majority of members of the Committee, in assessment in any one category.

11.4.6 The weighted overall average score for each applicant will be used to determine the success or otherwise of each application

11.5 Result Guide

11.5.1 As a general guide:

a) If the weighted overall average score is less than 7 the applicant will not be deemed promotable.

b) If the weighted overall average score is 7 or greater but less than 8 then the application will be further moderated.

c) If the weighted overall average score is 8 or above the applicant is deemed promotable, subject to recommendation of the committee convenor and approval of the relevant delegate

11.6 Moderation

11.6.1 All applicants deemed promotable or not promotable will require an agreement by the majority of the committee for the decision to stand or otherwise the decision will be referred for moderation.

11.6.2 All applicants having a weighted overall average score between 7 and 8 and those scored in the 8 range (where moderation is required consistent with11.4.5), will undergo further moderation by the committee.

11.6.3 Moderation will occur through a discussion of the relative merits of each application to determine through agreement by a majority whether or not to promote the applicant.

12 Additional Information

Responsibility: All Promotions Committees

12.1 Where a Committee assessing the application's merit does not have sufficient information or the appropriate contextual knowledge to make a reasonable judgement, it may seek additional information or assistance from those with that expertise.

12.2 A committee may invite applicants, a Head of School or other person to appear before it in order to provide information or clarification. Should the committee deem that this introduces new information into the process the applicant will be provided with that information and given a reasonable opportunity to provide a written response.

13 Conflict of Interest

Responsibility: Committee Members

13.1 Membership of academic promotions committees must be determined bearing in mind the University's Close Personal Relationships Policy, Conflict of Interest Policy and Guidelines (as amended).

13.2 A staff member or external person who has been engaged to serve on an academic promotions committee who becomes aware of a potential or actual conflict of interest must either:

13.2.1 declare the conflict or potential conflict to the Convenor of the Committee and defer acceptance of membership of the Committee until the Convenor has assessed the materiality of the conflict and determined whether the staff member or external person may accept the proposed committee position or

13.2.2 decline membership of the Committee and take no further part in the promotion process.

Responsibility: Convenor of Promotions Committee

13.3 The Convenor of an academic promotions committee who is advised of a conflict of interest (potential, perceived or actual) will determine the materiality of the conflict of interest and decide whether the conflicted member may serve on the academic promotions committee.

13.4 Where a declared conflict of interest is likely to influence the promotion process or outcome then the convenor must advise the conflicted member that they must not serve on the committee.

13.5 No one directly involved in the assessment of the applicant's case may serve as a referee or assessor. To ensure confidence in the independence of assessor reports, assessors will not be selected from school colleagues or recent collaborators.

14 Confidentiality

14.1 All information, other than procedural information, will remain confidential to the promotions committee. Only staff, including staff in Human Resources Branch, directly involved in the promotion process,, may have access to applications, referee reports, assessor reports and any other documentation associated with the promotion process.

15 Equity

Responsibility: Convenor of Promotions Committee

15.1 The convenor of promotions committees will be accountable for any equity issues in relation to the committee process and its recommendations. The promotion process must be considered according to principles of merit and equal opportunity employment. Every effort should be made to ensure gender balance, that is, that minority gender makes up at least 30% of the promotions committee membership. In addition, every attempt should also be made to ensure that promotions committee membership reflects diversity consistent with the diversity of the applicant group.

16 Academic Promotions Briefings

Responsibility: Human Resources Branch and Division of the Deputy Vice Chancellor and Vice President (Academic)

16.1 Briefing sessions (in collaboration with appropriate staff) will be offered for prospective applicants and members of promotions committees. Briefing sessions and other support processes will be made available in a practical, timely fashion to assist prospective applicants with the promotions process and decision makers with conducting the promotions process.

17 Approval of Promotion

Responsibility: Executive Dean

17.1 Levels B and C - On behalf of the Vice-Chancellor and President, the Executive Dean authorises promotion to Levels B and C and informs the Vice-Chancellor and President.

Responsibility: Vice-Chancellor and President

17.2 Levels D and E - The Vice-Chancellor approves promotion to Levels D and E.

18 Notification to Applicants

18.1 Promotion will not result in the automatic extension of a fixed-term appointment and in all cases the applicant's present level on the salary scale is irrelevant.

Responsibility: Convenor of Promotions Committee

18.2 In the case of applications for promotion to Levels B and C the Convenor of the promotions committee will notify the applicant's Executive Dean and Head of School of the outcome of the application.

Responsibility: Vice-Chancellor and President

18.3 In the case of applications for promotion to Levels D and E the Vice-Chancellor and President will notify an applicant, and the applicant's Executive Dean and Head of School of the outcome of the application.

Responsibility: Executive Dean

18.4 All unsuccessful applicants will meet with the relevant Executive Dean to discuss the reason that the application was not successful. They may also be provided with suggestions and advice that the Committee considers may increase the chances of a successful future application.

19 Appeal

19.1 Grounds for appeal

19.1.1 As documented in clause 8.3.6(e) of the Enterprise Agreement (as amended), the sole ground on which an appeal can be made is that there has been non-compliance with the Policy and Procedure and such non-compliance amounted to a serious defect in the assessment of merit.

19.2 Making an appeal

Responsibility: Applicant

19.2.1 An applicant may, within 10-working days of receiving the advice that they were unsuccessful in their application for promotion, seek a review by a Review Committee in accordance with the Enterprise Agreement.

19.2.2 An applicant must submit a written request outlining the reasons for appeal and any relevant supporting documentation to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor and Vice-President (Academic).

19.2.3 No appeal will be accepted outside the period given in clause 19.2.1.

19.3 Appeal Committees

19.3.1 The composition of the Appeal Committee, its terms of reference and the outcomes determined by the Committee will be in accordance with the Enterprise Agreement.

20 Out of Rounds Academic Promotions

Responsibility: Executive Dean

20.1 Where it is determined in the interests of the University to do so, an Executive Dean may make application through the DVC&VP(A) or DVC&VP(R) to the Vice Chancellor to consider an out of rounds promotion in the following situations:

20.1.1 Where a staff member provides evidence from a reputable institution of a plausible offer of employment by that other reputable institution

20.1.2 Where the exceptional achievement of a staff member has been recognised externally and the staff member makes a case to the appropriate Executive Dean.

20.2 If the Vice Chancellor approves the application to consider promotion outside the promotions round a Committee will be convened comprised of at least three members of the relevant Level Promotions Committee. The Committee members may meet face to face or virtually, depending on availability.

Responsibility: Vice Chancellor

20.3 On the recommendation of the Convenor of an Out of Rounds Committee the Vice Chancellor may approve promotion outside the academic promotions round.

21 Academic Titleholders

Responsibility: Titleholders

21.1 Titleholders applying for promotion for Levels B, C or D

Titleholders applying for promotion of title to Levels B, C or D may only apply for promotion by making a request to their Executive Dean at the time of conferral or renewal of appointment as a titleholder. In exceptional circumstances and where it is determined in the interests of the University to do so, an Executive Dean may consider a titleholder's application for promotion before the time for renewal of their title.

21.2 Titleholders applying for promotion to Level E

Titleholders applying for promotion to Level E may apply for promotion under the Promotions Procedure (Academic Staff and Titleholders) by following the requirements set out in this procedure for academic staff members who are applying for promotion to Level E and meeting the criteria set out in clause 21.3.

21.3 Criteria for Promotion to Level E Titleholder

An application:

21.3.1 must demonstrate excellence in academic leadership and high academic distinction based on a substantial contribution to the discipline, any associated profession and the University

21.3.2 must demonstrate high quality teaching and international reputation in research

21.3.3 should demonstrate academic excellence under the Teaching (and related duties) including supervision and Research, scholarship and creative activity and Professional activity categories.

21.3.4 should include properly documented examples of exceptional contribution to Service and leadership, for example, the achievement of significant outcomes, distinction and leadership, and contributions to policy development.

21.4 Applications by Titleholders for promotion to Level E will be considered by a committee convened annually for this purpose, if required.

Responsibility: Level E Titleholders' Promotions Committee

21.5 In assessing an application for promotion to Level E Titleholder the Committee will take into consideration issues such as the level of clinical and other non-academic activities that influence output against each of the four assessment categories.

21.6 Terms of Reference of Level E Titleholders' Promotions Committee

21.6.1 The Committee undertaking the assessment should decide whether the application meets the criteria for promotion to Level E and ensure that standards are consistently applied.

21.6.2 The recommendation made by the Committee should be based on the evidence presented.

21.6.3 The process used will be equitable and transparent to ensure that a fair and objective decision is reached.

22

23

23.1

23.2

23.3

23.4

23.5

23.6

20

16

17

18

19

20

21

21.7 Composition of the Level E Titleholders' Promotion Committee will be as follows:

21.7.1 Deputy Vice-Chancellor & Vice-President (Academic) or Deputy Vice-Chancellor & Vice-President (Research) as Convenor

21.7.2 Executive Dean of the relevant Faculty

21.7.3 Two academics employed by the University

21.7.4 Two Level E Titleholders

21.8 The Committee may decide to interview applicants and/or request that the applicants deliver a presentation.

22 Definitions:

Academic Focus Area - means one of three areas of focus chosen by an academic staff member to reflect the focus of their academic workload when applying for promotion, being:

* General Academic - refers to an academic staff member whose academic workload allocation reflects a traditional academic role with a focus on both teaching and research activity.

* Research focussed - refers to an academic staff member whose academic workload is predominately in research and research related activities

* Teaching focussed - refers to an academic staff member whose academic workload is predominately in learning and teaching, educational design and delivery and educational leadership.

Merit - means the extent to which an application has demonstrated the capacity of the applicant to meet the academic requirements of the University at the higher level as assessed against the relevant criteria.

Promotion Schedule - provides details of when the call for applications will occur, when the committees will meet to consider the applications and when applicants will be notified of the outcome.

Research - includes "original investigation undertaken to gain knowledge and insight" as defined and referred to in the Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research and may include collaborative research.

Special Case application - refers only to an application made by a Research Only academic under the Enterprise Agreement

Refer: Enterprise Agreement clause 5.3.2c)i) as amended

Weighted Overall Average Score - refers to the calculated final weighted score for an individual that will be used to determine eligibility for academic promotion. The score is an average of the individual weighted scores allocated for an individual by each committee member.

Further Information

If you require assistance in understanding any aspect of this procedure please contact the Human Resources Services Centre, extension 31111 or email hrservicecentre@adelaide.edu.au

Date uploaded 2 September 2014


Policy Control Information

RMO File No. 2015/4394
Policy custodian Chief Operating Officer
Responsible policy officer Executive Director, Human Resources
Endorsed by Vice-Chancellors Executive
Approved by Vice-Chancellor and President
Related Policies University of Adelaide Enterprise Agreement (as amended)

Code of Conduct

Behaviour and Conduct Policy

Recruitment Policy

Remuneration and Employment Benefits Policy

Workforce Management Policy

Leaving the University Policy

Health, Safety and Wellbeing Policy

Related legislation Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth)
Superceded Policies Performance, Development and Promotions Policy

Staff Development Policy

Staff Planning, Development and Review Policy and Guidelines

Staff Development Secondment and Exchange Policy and Guidelines

Staff Development Time Off for Study for General Staff Policy and Guidelines

Reward and Recognition Framework Policy

Effective from 6 October 2015
Review Date 6 October 2018
Contact for queries about the policy HR Service Centre 8313 1111

Please refer to the Policy Directory for the latest version.