2012 Guide for Applicants

Enquiries relating to this guide should be directed to Kym Davis.

Applications for the 2012 Academic Promotion round are to be submitted in two stages.

Part A: Assessment of Eligibility is due on Friday, 13 April 2012 AND
Part B: Application for Promotion is due on Monday, 2 July 2012 by 5.00pm

Applicants must complete a Part A Application Form (DOC 104kb), and a Part B Application Form (DOC 161kb) and submit to acpromotion@usq.edu.au by the closing dates specified above.

1 Overview

2 Eligibility to Apply

3 Definitions

4 Criteria for Promotion

5 Advice

6 Applications

7 The Interview Process

8 Referees

9 The Promotion Panel

10 The Rating Process

11 Notification of Decisions

12 Appeals

13 Confidentiality

Appendix 1 - Promotion for Academic Employees Policy
Appendix 2 - Academic Promotion Timeframes

1. Overview

The information contained in this document has been compiled to assist in the preparation of an application for academic promotion.

The policy on Promotion for Academic Employees in the USQ Policy Library and included as Appendix 1 of this guide, states that:

The University will annually provide an opportunity for academic employees to seek promotion to the next level on the basis of meritorious performance. In exceptional circumstances it is possible to seek promotion over more than one level.

There will be no quota on the number of promotions recommended to the Vice-Chancellor in any one year but recommendations for each level of promotion will be presented in rank order for the Vice-Chancellor's approval. The number of successful applicants may be subject to budgetary constraints.

The University is committed to the principle of equal opportunity in promotion and recognises that employees contribute to its vision and goals in diverse ways. The achievements of candidates for promotion are considered relative to the particular circumstances of their career progression and the opportunities which have been available to them.

Principles of Academic Promotion

Three general principles guide the design and operation of the academic promotion process. These principles are:

Fairness - decisions are made objectively, based on explicit evidence
Openness - clearly identified process and criteria
Consistency - between stated criteria and actual decisions reached.

Promotional appointments are to be approved by the Vice-Chancellor based on the recommendations of the University Moderation Panel. The merit principle underpins the promotion process, hence Promotion Panel recommendations will be based on each applicant's personal application and interview (where applicable) measured against the specified promotion criteria.

Appendix 2 contains the Academic Promotion Timeframes, an outline of anticipated dates for important events in the process. The timeframes for the Promotion process will, as far as possible, follow this schedule.

2010 Policy Change

The policy change from biannual to annual rounds has resulted in restrictions being introduced governing the interval periods between applications. Employees who were unsuccessful in their application for promotion in one year may not apply for promotion in the following year, except where:

the application in the previous year was a first application for promotion to that level, or
the applicant was deemed ineligible in the previous year and the applicant’s eligibility requirements have subsequently changed for the current year’s application (eg Doctoral qualification has been awarded)

However, an employee who was unsuccessful in their application for promotion in one year may submit a case to the University Moderation Panel for approval to apply in the following year, where it can be demonstrated that substantial progress has been made towards addressing improvements identified in feedback received on the previous year’s application. The University Moderation Panel will assess this request. Any applicant who falls into this category must complete the relevant section within Part A: Assessment of Eligibility form (DOC 104kb).

This document is intended to serve as a guide only and has been compiled to assist USQ staff members in the preparation of their application. It is very important that applicants have a clear understanding of the current policy and regulations contained in the Promotion for Academic Employees policy (attached as Appendix 1).

Applicants must complete the Academic Promotion Application Forms in accordance with the stated timeframes. APPLICATIONS RECEIVED AT HUMAN RESOURCES AFTER THE CLOSING DATES WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED. Only in very exceptional circumstances will the Chair of the Promotion Panel accept a late application.

2. Eligibility to Apply

Qualifications

USQ staff planning to make application should note the eligibility conditions for each promotion category, as outlined in the Academic Promotion Policy section 2.1.1 which states that:

To be eligible to apply for promotion academic employees will:

Have completed at least one year's service in the University in a fractional or full-time appointment as at the closing date of applications.
For promotion to Level B, should have a masters qualification in the relevant discipline area, or equivalent accreditation or standing
For promotion to Level C, D and E, should have a doctoral qualification in the relevant discipline area, or equivalent accreditation or standing

Equivalent Accreditation or Standing

Where applicants do not possess the required qualification, cases will be considered for equivalence on the basis of professional accreditation or standing.

‘Equivalent accreditation’ means that if an examining body, profession or similar institute admits a person to one of its awards or levels of membership, 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 accreditation to the particular University award.
‘Equivalent standing’ means that applicants must demonstrate equivalence to the required qualification with regard to teaching experience, experience in research and scholarship, experience outside tertiary education in industry, creative achievement, professional contributions and/or to technical achievement.

A candidate seeking to establish equivalent accreditation or standing must prepare a written case which substantiates the claimed equivalence. Applicants must complete the relevant section in Part A of the application.

Evidence subsequently provided in Part B to support a case for promotion must be of a different nature and impact from the evidence used to substantiate equivalent accreditation or standing in Part A.

Applicants may also request consideration for special circumstances, including career breaks, gender, family or other factors which may have impacted their qualifications, accreditation or standing.

Additionally, employees who at the time of applying for promotion, are in the process of submitting the relevant higher degree may be considered for promotion conditional on confirmation of eligibility to graduate in the higher degree following the promotion round, provided that it is within 12 months from the date of notification of the conditional promotion decision. A case must be submitted in writing to the University Moderation Panel for consideration of eligibility. If successful, the promotion will be effective from date of receipt of qualification and will not be backdated to 1 January.

Previous applications

Employees who were unsuccessful in their application for promotion in one year may not apply for promotion in the following year, except where:

the application in the previous year was a first application for promotion to that level, or
the applicant was deemed ineligible in the previous year and the applicant’s eligibility requirements have subsequently changed for the current year’s application (eg Doctoral qualification has been awarded)

Withdrawal of application

An applicant who submits an application under Part A: Assessment of Eligibility and subsequently withdraws their application, either prior to or following submission of a full application under Part B: Application for Promotion, will not have their eligibility to apply in the following year affected, provided the application has not progressed to the stage of assessment through formal evaluation mechanisms, ie Faculty Promotion Committee or University Promotion Committee.

Withdrawals of applications must be made in writing to Human Resources via acpromotion@usq.edu.au prior to consideration by the Faculty Promotion Committee (for applications to Level B or C) or University Promotion Committee (for applications to Level D or E) - refer to Appendix 2 - Timeframes for details.

Moderation Panel review of eligibility

The University Moderation Panel will then meet to review all applications to determine whether eligibility requirements, including qualifications or equivalency requirements, have been met for the level of promotion sought, prior to Part B: Application for Promotion being called from eligible applicants.

3. Definitions

The USQ Policy Library provides the following definitions:

Teaching

Teaching is a creative activity designed to foster students' learning, their ability and desire to undertake scholarly work, and their personal development and creativity. Teaching draws upon the professional and disciplinary expertise of staff and is continually revitalised by research, scholarship, consultancy or professional practice. Teaching includes the design, implementation and evaluation of curriculum materials for all modes of delivery.

Scholarship

Scholarship refers to the analysis and interpretation of existing knowledge aimed at improving, through teaching or by other means of communication, the depth of human understanding.

Research

Research is taken to mean systematic and rigorous investigation aimed at the discovery of previously unknown phenomena, the development of explanatory theory and its application to new situations or problems, and the construction of original works of significant intellectual merit.

4. Criteria for Promotion

Section 2.1.1 of the Promotion for Academic Employees Policy sets out three criteria for promotion:

Teaching and Related Scholarship
Research and Original Achievement
Service to the University, Community and Profession.

Applicants must address all three promotion criteria and demonstrate that they satisfy the performance standards necessary for promotion. The following information is provided in order to assist applicants in demonstrating achievements under the respective criteria. This is a guide only and is not an exhaustive list. Some of the suggestions may not be appropriate for certain disciplines.

Applicants should be mindful of the 16 page limit with respect to the application form. The mandatory Supervisor's Statement is in addition to the 16 pages.

Applicants may request consideration for special circumstances, including career breaks, gender, family or other factors which may have resulted in an alternative profile in one or more of the criteria or limited their career progression.

Applicants are advised that special consideration usually relates only to the quantum of achievement expected, not to its quality.

Applicants are strongly advised to seek evidence concerning the extent to which assigned duties are performed and the quality of performance in their current position.

(i) Teaching and Related Scholarship

In accordance with the above definitions, this criterion may include: face-to-face classroom teaching; the various modes of distance education teaching (including online mode, the preparation of print, voice, visual or electronic materials and contact with students directly or by telephone, computer link, or video link); the teaching of groups other than award students (including fellow employees); postgraduate supervision; curriculum, course and instructional design; educational leadership and scholarship associated with teaching.

To address this criterion, you should prepare a portfolio which summarises your major accomplishments and strengths in teaching/scholarship. Documentation should clearly indicate not only your level of productivity, but also the quality of your output.

The portfolio should present an overall picture of your interests, achievements, and the impact of your activities on the student, academic and/or regional community. It should include some or all of the following:

1. A brief statement of your philosophy and/ or general approach to teaching and scholarship and their relationship to the University mission.

2. A concise teaching profile, including:

subject area expertise
courses taught/contribution/workload
honours and postgraduate students supervised to successful completion
other significant activities

3. Evidence of the effectiveness and quality of your teaching and scholarship and educational leadership¹

an outline of the objectives in your teaching/scholarship and how these were achieved
student evaluation/rating summaries²
assessments by peers or independent experts
student achievement
provision of intellectual stimulus for students
monitoring, evaluation and improvement of teaching and subjects
preparation and production of teaching materials for conventional and flexible delivery, including study book authorship, together with users'/readers' evaluative comments.
contributions to an innovation in educational methodology, curricula and teaching materials
receipt of a teaching award or similar accolade
receipt of an award for the design and delivery of teaching materials

4. Evidence of effective educational leadership

course coordination
unit team leadership
course and curriculum design
staff development and mentorship

5. Evidence of research and innovation in teaching and learning³

published outcomes in books/refereed journals
refereed conference proceedings
commissioned reports of a developmental nature
teaching grants

6. Other evidence as appropriate, for example, for employees in other than 'research only' positions, evidence of interest and participation in professional development activities that enhance teaching, learning and assessment at USQ.

___________________________

¹ Evaluation of teaching should include: self assessment, peer assessment and student assessment. Applicants should, where possible, provide factual, statistically-valid information which will take precedence over uncorroborated claims and the opinions of others (including students).

² The University provides instruments for student evaluation of courses in all modes. For your external courses and online courses check the evaluation questionnaire is included. For day-mode courses check with the head of your academic course to ensure it is administered. Include for the Promotion Panel any qualitative comments you wish to make, eg that you teach a compulsory or service course. Alternative instruments may be used if desired. Applicants are advised of the risk of not including the results of student evaluations in their portfolio. Equally applicants are strongly advised not to rely solely on student evaluations and to use other quantitative and qualitative evaluations wherever possible.

³ Applicants, particularly those whose discipline or interest is in educational research, may choose to include this matter either under the Teaching and Scholarship criterion or under the Research and Original Achievement criterion but not both.

(ii) Research and Original Achievement

This criterion encompasses all forms of original intellectual or cultural achievement including: research, exhibitions, performance, unique consultancy and the leadership, scholarship, publication, commercialisation and information/technology transfer associated with these activities. For simplicity, in the following paragraphs the word research will be taken in the widest sense to represent all of these forms of original achievement.

A research portfolio is a scholarly summary of your major accomplishments and strengths in research. Documentation should clearly indicate not only your level of productivity, but also the quality of your output. The portfolio should present an overall picture of your research interests, achievements, and the impact of your work on the academic, professional and/or regional community.

The following list provides suggestions concerning the type of information that you could provide in your portfolio:

General research philosophy and relationship to the University mission.
Personal areas of research interest.
Particular achievements during the past twelve months.
Full list of publications distinguishing those subject to peer review before publication, eg in a refereed journal. Distinguish the source and nature of the referee process - e.g. that the referees are scholars independent of authors and publishers. Where publications are jointly with others, detail the extent of your personal contribution. Where publications are drawn from conference papers this should be shown, where a publication covers similar material to another this should be indicated.
Full list of creative work, including:
Musical compositions, performances or interpretations;
Art exhibitions;
Theatrical performances.
One or two examples of your most influential publications. (with brief justification of your selection)
Details of conference presentations (highlighting invited contributions and Keynote Addresses where appropriate) and indicating the nature of the invitation e.g. whether it was unsolicited or sought.
Description of the impact of your research on the academic, professional and/or general community as indicated, for example by:
Independent reviews of published or creative work;
Citation details for some selected publications;
Inclusion of your work within major teaching texts;
Journal Citation reports - impact factor of published work;
Collaboration with business or industry.
Details of success in obtaining competitive research funding, distinguishing external funding from internal grants.
Evidence of research leadership and research administration, such as:
Research team management;
Initiatives taken to stimulate the research of others;
Involvement in conference organisation;
Active and contributing membership of research related committees.
Journal editorship responsibilities.
Reviewing duties for academic journals.
Reviewing duties for granting bodies.
Patents.
Engineering or architectural designs.
Discipline based scholarship:
Textbooks you have written, together with readers' evaluative comments.
Book reviews and review articles published.
Theses and dissertations you have supervised to successful conclusion.
Theses and dissertations you have examined.
Other areas which demonstrate a high level of scholarship or professional skill which have made an identifiable contribution within a discipline.

Personal paid consultancies should not be included in research unless there is published output of original research significant to the discipline. Consultancies on the University's behalf may be appropriately included as University service.

The research portfolio should be a succinct document that pulls together all the evidence you can gather to demonstrate your expertise and accomplishments.

The following book may be found useful:

Beatty, Kate, ed: So Where's Your Research Profile?: A Resource Book for Academics. South Melbourne, UACA, 1993

Note that "double counting" within your application should be avoided. Where, for instance, gaining your doctorate qualifies you to apply for a particular promotion, your doctoral research will not be considered as evidence of research output.

As described previously, evidence provided in Part B to support a case for promotion must be of a different nature and impact from the evidence used to substantiate equivalent accreditation or standing in Part A. For example, in Part A a body of research may be used to demonstrate equivalence of doctoral qualification. However, the impact of this research where the researcher is an international leader may be used to demonstrate capability to perform at the promotion level sought.

(iii) Service to the University, Community and Profession

In the Guidelines for Assessment for Promotion, Section 3 states:

This area relates to the need for academic staff to contribute in an appropriate and sustained way to the corporate life of the University, the community good and the development of their profession in domains such as:

contributions to the formulation and implementation of academic policy;
the initiation (or active maintenance) of linkages between the University and the community, employers of graduates and professional institutions.

Applicants should provide a portfolio of service with the emphasis on achievement and leadership (rather than merely activity) and which may include:

Contributions to institutional planning and/or governance and/or academic goals.
Managerial, administrative and other contributions to work of faculty and department.
Service on committees of inquiry and working parties (identify committee, purpose of committee, role played, membership duration and contribution).
Active and contributing membership of Academic or Faculty Boards.
Service to the relevant profession.
Membership of and participation in the activities of professional bodies/learned societies.
Involvement in continuing education programs.
Education in the wider community.
Public lectures
Media comment of an expert nature or service as an expert witness.
Consulting (services supplied, agencies).
Professional practice (nature, extent, duration, clientele).
Any involvement in community groups which utilises the professional, academic, leadership or management skills of the applicant.

Where a research project/paper/event is undertaken as part of a team, it is important to outline the level of your personal contribution in each area. It is recommended that this be displayed in a table which clearly indicates the percentage of your involvement and contribution to achieve the outcome/result. This will provide the panel with a fair and accurate representation of your level of contribution and involvement towards each specific research project/paper/event etc.

5. Advice

The Academic Board suggests that applicants seek advice from experienced, independent sources in the production of their application and in preparation for the interview (where applicable). A senior scholar from another Faculty and a detached mentor from the applicant's own Faculty or a previous promotion panel member could all be helpful in reading applications before submission as well as supervisors.

6. Applications (Self Assessment)

Following a call for Part B applications by Human Resources, applicants are required to submit via email the completed Part B Application Form to acpromotion@usq.edu.au by the closing date specified in the Academic Promotion Schedule (Appendix 2). Applications received after this date will not be accepted. Once submitted, no additional information may be included in the application, except as specified in (iv) below.

(i) Curriculum Vitae

Curricula Vitae should be presented within the allocated sections of the application form to promote consistency and readability.
Curricula Vitae would normally contain information such as books and papers published, research experience, performances, exhibitions and the like, but as these are to be addressed in the promotion criteria, applicants are advised not to include such information here.

(ii) Promotion Criteria

Documented evidence should be collated under the following specific headings and addressed in the following order:

teaching and related scholarship
research and original achievement
services to the University, community and profession

(iii) Statement by Supervisor

Applicants are required to include a statement by their supervisor addressing the three selection criteria. This statement is not included in the the 16 page limit.

(iv) Updating the Application

Applicants are permitted to submit, one week prior to the formal assessment meetings, a one page summary of achievements that have resulted since their application was first made, for example, first semester student evaluations or evidence of further new research. No additional documents may be submitted at the interview itself, except in the case student evaluations at USQ in Semester 1, 2012, where this does not become available until immediately prior to the promotion meeting or interview (where relevant).

7. The Interview Process

For promotion to Levels B and C interviews will be at the panels discretion. For example, applicants may be called for interview where further clarification is required or there is significant variation in ratings.

For applicants for promotion to Levels D and E interviews will normally be conducted and will, as far as possible, occur during the time period outlined in the Schedule.

Firm interview dates and times will be conveyed to all applicants as early as possible to ensure availability. All applicants should strive to be available for face-to-face interview although a telephone interview may be arranged if the Chair of the Panel judges the circumstances make this necessary. The purpose of the interview is to explore selected matters from the application, supervisor's statement and referee reports, and to give the applicant an opportunity to present more recent information.

(i) Early Interview

One session of early interviews may be scheduled if the relevant panel deems this necessary to accommodate those applicants unable to attend scheduled interviews owing to unavoidable and extraordinary circumstances. If an applicant requires this option the procedure detailed below should be followed. However, if applicants know they will be unavailable during the interview period, they should consider the option of a telephone interview during the scheduled interview period.

Method of applying for early interviews

Interview dates outlined on the Academic Promotion Schedule are guides only. Final dates will be determined once applications have closed and all applications have been received.
All applicants will be notified of the finalised dates as soon as possible.
Applicants will then have one week to:
(a) ensure availability at the relevant time and confirm this with the Human Resources Officer (Organisational Development), Human Resources, OR
(b) seek approval for an early interview if unavoidable and extraordinary circumstances prevail.
Applicants wishing to seek approval for early interview must submit reasons in writing to the Chair, Promotion Panel through the Human Resources Officer (Organisational Development),
If the request for early interview is forwarded at the time of submitting the application, the letter should be separate from the application itself.

Applicants should note that inability to attend scheduled interviews owing to clashes with lecture timetables, for example, do not constitute unavoidable and extraordinary circumstances and will not warrant inclusion for early interview (rescheduling of a class or exchanging with another staff member are appropriate means of ensuring availability).

(ii) Interview Format

The interview will be 30* minutes in duration and will normally follow the format detailed below:

Greeting and introduction by Chair, Academic Promotion
[Optional] Applicant provides a two-minute summary of any new evidence.
Promotion Criteria: The Core Panel Members, Dean/Director and/or Faculty Representatives leads applicant through a discussion focusing on the criteria and the application.
Applicant will have 1-2 minutes for a final summary of strengths.

Total 30 minutes

*Please note: interviews for Level E will be 45 minutes in duration and will normally follow the format detailed above.

(iii) Feedback

If applicants wish to provide feedback to the panel concerning the promotion process following the interview and prior to decisions being announced. Such feedback should be forwarded to Human Resources who will make it available to the Review Panel. Please refer to Appendix Two for dates.

8. Referees

(i) Criteria

Applicants should choose referees who are sufficiently aware of their recent and current work to give informed advice and to comment on their achievements in the promotion criteria.

It is usually expected that referees will, where appropriate, hold appointment to a more senior academic level than the applicant and that referees will be people of standing in the relevant academic/professional fields whose judgement can be relied upon by the Promotion Panel. The referees may not be members of the relevant Promotion Panel. For further detail please refer to attachment one.

(ii) Referees' Role

Each of the three referees will be asked to comment in strict confidence on the candidate's merit in terms of the promotion criteria. Referee reports will be structured according to the form issued to referees by USQ's Human Resources, but referees may also be requested to address specific questions if the Panel wishes. In this instance, referees will be notified accordingly by a representative of Human Resources.

(iii) Applicants' Role

Applicants applying for promotion to Lecturer (Level B) and Senior Lecturer (Level C) must choose three (3) referees of whom at least one (1) must be external to USQ and preferably recognised as leaders in the profession.

Applicants applying for promotion to Associate Professor (Level D) and Professor (Level E) must choose three (3) referees of whom at least two (2) must be external to USQ.

Applicants must avoid nominating referees who are members of the relevant Promotion Panel. Deans/Directors may be consulted with respect to choosing referees.

Applicants are responsible for providing correct contact details on the application form so that all referee reports are available by the due date. Contact details must include:

name
business address
contact telephone number during business hours
facsimile number during business hours
e-mail address.

Applicants must communicate to referees full details regarding anticipated dates by which referee reports will be requested to ensure contact details are appropriate. They should also provide each referee with a copy of the full application, preferably at the time of submitting the application to Human Resources. Applicants are strongly advised to follow-up with their referees to ensure they have all the information they need and are responding in time.

Human Resources cannot be held responsible for incorrect or non-current contact details. Human Resources will make reasonable attempts to follow-up with referees, but cannot be held responsible for the failure of referees to respond by the due date.

9. The Promotion Panels

The promotion process utilises a number of panels.

(i) The Promotion Panels

As defined in the policy, the Promotion Panel for Academic Levels B and C will be constituted as follows:

Dean of Faculty (Chair),
One senior academic employee (at Level C or above) nominated by the Dean of Faculty
Two academic employees from the faculty nominated by the relevant Faculty Board, both of whom must have submitted an expression of interest to the Board and be an Academic Level C or above. (At least one of the nominated members to be female except where the Faculty has fewer than four (4) female academic employees)
One member, external to the faculty, at Level C or above nominated by the Senior Deputy Vice-Chancellor
President, USQ Branch of NTEU (or nominee) as observer
Senior HR Officer (Organisational Development) (or nominee) as Executive Officer

Where an application is received from an Indigenous staff member, the promotion committee is to be reconstituted, prior to the consideration of any applications, to include an Indigenous Academic from any higher education institution. This will be an additional committee position. In this circumstance the Executive Officer to the Promotion Committee will request that the Senior Deputy Vice-Chancellor nominate the Indigenous staff member to become a committee member.

The Committee for applicants from the LTS, LRDS, CAIK and other non-faculty departments will be comprised of the following:

Director/Head of Section (Chair)
One (1) academic employee from the non-faculty department nominated by the relevant Department Board, whom must have submitted an expression of interest and be an Academic Level C or above (where possible)
Dean from a relevant faculty
One representative from a relevant faculty (at Academic Level C or above)
One member, external to the department or nominated faculty, at Level C or above nominated by the Senior Deputy Vice-Chancellor (to ensure appropriate gender representation wherever possible)
President, USQ Branch of NTEU (or nominee) as observer
Senior HR Officer (Organisational Development) (or nominee) as Executive Officer

Should the Director/Head of Section be amongst the applicants for promotion, the Vice-Chancellor will appoint a Pro Vice-Chancellor from a relevant portfolio to Chair the Committee.

Any employee who is an applicant will not be a member of the committee.

Committee members will not act as a referee for any applicant submitting an application to that committee

The University Promotion Panel for Levels D and E will be constituted as follows:

Senior Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Chair)
Chair, Academic Board
An Academic employee at the level of Associate Professor or Professor nominated by the Vice-Chancellor (to ensure appropriate gender representation wherever possible)
Dean of Faculty
Two academic employees from the Faculty nominated by the relevant Faculty Board, both of whom must have submitted an expression of interest to the Board and be an Academic Level D or above. (At least one of the nominated members to be female, except where the Faculty has fewer than four (4) female academic employees)
Two external discipline assessors for each applicant for promotion to Academic Level E as recommended by the Dean of Faculty
President, USQ Branch of NTEU (or nominee) as observer
Senior HR Officer (Organisational Development) (or nominee) as Executive Officer

The Committee for applicants from the LTS, LRDS, CAIK and other non-faculty departments will be comprised of the following:

Senior Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Chair)
Chair, Academic Board
An Academic employee at the level of Associate Professor or Professor nominated by the Vice-Chancellor (to ensure appropriate gender representation wherever possible)
Director/Head of Section
One academic employee from the non-faculty department nominated by the relevant Department Board, whom must have submitted an expression of interest and be an Academic Level D or above (where possible)
One Dean from a relevant Faculty
Two external discipline assessors for each applicant for promotion to Academic Level E as recommended by the Director/Head of Section
Observer and Executive Officer as specified above

Should the Director/Head of Section be amongst the applicants for promotion, the Vice-Chancellor will appoint an additional Pro Vice-Chancellor of a relevant portfolio to the Committee.

Any employee who is an applicant will not be a member of the committee.

Committee members will not act as a referee for any applicant submitting an application to that committee.

The function of the Promotion Panels is to rate all applicants in a particular academic subdivision in accordance with promotion criteria and other special circumstances which may prevail on the basis of the written application and interview. Each applicant is categorised as 'Promotable' or 'Not Promotable at this stage'.

The observers ensure equity and fairness in the process.

(ii) The Moderation Panel

A Moderation Panel reviews cases for eligibility, the outcomes of each Faculty interview, considers where a Faculty panel may be deadlocked on the merits of a particular applicant, formulates the overall ranking of applicants and prepares recommendations to the Vice-Chancellor. The membership of the moderation panel is comprised of the following:

Senior Deputy Vice-Chancellor, Chair
The Deans* from each faculty (or nominee, provided the nominee has/will participate as a member of the University Promotion Committee in that round),
Chair, Academic Board
A nominee of the Vice-Chancellor drawn from the external members of the Faculty and University Promotion Committees,
President, USQ Branch of NTEU (or nominee) as observer
Senior HR Officer (Organisational Development) as Executive Officer

*Directors/Head of Section of non-Faculty departments where appropriate.

(iii) The Review Panel

The Review Panel consists of the members from all promotion panels as well as the Observers. It meets at the conclusion of the promotion round to review the process and to discuss any feedback and to make recommendations to the Academic Board on improvements to the process.

10. The Rating Process

The Promotion Panel will assess applicants and rate each one based on the evidence provided in the application and any supporting documentation, confirmed by the interview process (where applicable).

Applicants should refer to Section 2.3.2 of the Promotion for Academic Employees Policy for further information regarding the rating process.

11. Notification of Decisions

Following the decision of the Vice-Chancellor, the Dean of Faculty will personally inform each applicant once formal written advice from Human Resources is available.

Promotion will become effective from 1 January of the following year and successful applicants will normally be appointed at Step One of the salary classification to which they are promoted.

Post-Decision Feedback

Unsuccessful applicants will be provided with post-decision verbal feedback by the Chair of the Panel, the Dean/Director of the relevant Faculty/Department and the applicant's supervisor will also be present for developmental purposes. Such feedback will normally focus on providing unsuccessful applicants with advice about identified deficiencies and what is required in order to address these deficiencies.

12. Appeals

Unsuccessful applicants may appeal against decisions in accordance with Section 2.6 of the Promotion for Academic Employees Policy.

Where an employee appeals a decision on eligibility as an outcome of Part A, the appeal will also be heard in accordance with section 2.6 with appeals being submitted in writing and forwarded to the Executive Director, Human Resources within four weeks of the notification of promotion outcomes in December of each year. Where the Promotion Appeals Panel considers there has been a breach of the University's procedures and/or that natural justice was not afforded in relation to eligibility, the recommendation in relation to eligibility will be provided to the Vice-Chancellor for decision. Where the Vice-Chancellor supports the recommendation on eligibility, the University will reconvene the relevant Promotion Committee and the employee will then progress through normal promotion procedures.

13. Confidentiality

Information is sought from applicants in strict confidence and used solely for the promotion process.

Appendix 1 - Promotion for Academic Employees Policy

Appendix 2 - Academic Promotion Timeframes 2012

Action	Date
Call for Part A: Assessment of Eligibility applications	5 March 2012
Part A: Eligibility applications close	13 April 2012 (5.00pm)
Eligibility checking by Human Resources	16-18 April 2012
Moderation Panel meeting to consider eligibility	18-27 April 2012
Notification of eligibility	1 May 2012
Call for Part B: Application for Promotion	4 May 2012
Part B: Applications close at Human Resources	2 July 2012 (5.00pm)
Final date for application for early interview	2 July 2012
Nominated referees contacted	16 July 2012
External assessors nominated (where applicable)	16 July 2012
Briefing Meeting - Core/Observers/Deans/Directors/Faculty Reps	July 2012 (TBA)
Referee reports deadline	31 August 2012
Notify applicants of interview date and schedule times accordingly	3-21 September 2012
External assessor reports due (where applicable)	14 September 2012
Faculty Promotion Committee Meetings	3-21 September 2012
University Promotion Committee Interviews	24 September-12 October 2012
Moderation Panel Meeting	22-26 October 2012
Recommendations to Vice-Chancellor	9 November 2012
Decision announced/conveyed to applicants, Deans/Directors	30 November 2012
Appeal period closes	4 January 2013
Review Panel - Core/Observers/Deans/Directors/Faculty Reps	TBA
Promotion decisions effective	1 January 2013