Loughborough University
Leicestershire, UK
LE11 3TU
+44 (0)1509 222222
Loughborough University

Human Resources

A-Z content

Personal Titles

Cases for promotion to a Personal Chair or the award of the title Reader will be considered by the Sub-Committee for the Award of Titles.  A Dean of School may recommend a member of staff for promotion to a Personal Chair or Readership at any time but should be mindful that the Sub-Committee currently meets three times a year.  Please submit applications to Sophie Hall, Human Resources preferably by email to S.Hall@lboro.ac.uk If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact Anne Lamb, Deputy Director, Human Resources, by email to a.e.p.lamb@lboro.ac.uk

The next scheduled meetings are:

 
Tuesday 25 January 2018 (deadline for the receipt of applications is Friday 15 December 2017)
 
Friday 11 May 2018 (deadline for the receipt of applications is Friday 6 April 2018)

 

 

The Sub-Committee membership is as follows:

Provost - Chair

PVC(E) - ex-officio

PVC(R) - ex-officio

PVC(T) - ex-officio

Plus three senior professors from across the University, they are currently Professor Neil Dixon, Professor Eran Edirisinghe and Professor Marsha Meskimmon

Introduction

1.  Introduction

1.1 Cases for promotion to a Personal Chair or the award of the title Reader will be considered by the Personal Titles Sub-Committee (the Committee). This document is intended to provide guidance to candidates and Schools on the procedure and the criteria against which submissions will be assessed.

1.2 Applications are considered by the Committee, which meets three times per year or more frequently, if required. (Dates of meetings will be included in the University Calendar and deadlines for submission will appear on the HR webpages). 

1.3 Successful promotions will take effect from the first day of the following month and will be reported to Senate and Council via the Human Resources Committee (HRC).

Eligibility

2.    Eligibility

2.1 An application for the title of Reader or Chair may be made by any member of academic staff, to their Dean. It is the responsibility of the Dean to submit the application to the Committee. In cases where an individual wishes to be considered for the award of a personal title, but does not have the support of their Dean, they may apply direct to the Committee.

2.2 Schools should proactively identify candidates who are worthy of promotion but who do not put themselves forward.

2.3 Candidates are encouraged to draw specific attention to what might be perceived as an atypical career profile.

2.4 The criteria for promotion are available below.

2.5 Claims based principally on promise will be rejected. Decisions are taken on the evidence of actual performance.

Process

3.1 There are two routes by which a personal title may be considered, although Route 2 will be used only in exceptional circumstances.

Route 1 (Standard)

3.2 Schools should have a clear and transparent process in place to determine which cases are to be supported. When a Dean of School wishes to recommend a member of staff for a personal title, they should first consult with the School’s senior management team and other senior colleagues as appropriate.  After consultation, if the view of the Dean is that the candidate satisfies the criteria they should submit a case to the Committee.

3.3 Individuals who wish to be considered for promotion, but who do not have the support of their Dean, may submit the required paperwork to HR so that their case can be considered at the next available meeting.

3.4 All standard submissions must adhere to the publicised Committee’s deadlines. Late applications will not be accepted and will be deferred to the next meeting.  Incomplete applications will be sent back to the Dean for completion by the individual concerned before being considered. Deans are encouraged not to wait until the deadline before submitting applications.

3.5 Cases will be considered by the Committee, chaired by the Provost and Deputy Vice-Chancellor. An individual who is dissatisfied with the outcome of their application has the right to appeal (see section 5).

 a) When an application is first considered, the Committee will judge whether or not it deems the case worthy of promotion. If a decision not to proceed is made, applicants will be given feedback from the Committee.

 b) If the Committee determines that a promotion is justified, then in order to validate the Committee’s decision, the five external referees will be approached, by  the secretary to the Committee, for their views.  Reports from referees will be kept confidential to the Committee.

 c) At a subsequent meeting, the Committee will review cases when at least four external references have been received and make a decision on the available evidence. Where the references all support the promotion, the Chair of the Committee may approve the promotion by Chair’s action. Any such promotions will be reported at the next meeting.

 d) Applicants and their Deans will be advised of progress after each meeting. However, feedback will be of a general nature, particularly in regard to reports from referees.

 e) The Committee will report its decisions to HRC and subsequently Senate and Council will be notified.

3.6 If an application is made without the support of the Dean, the Committee may decide that one or more external assessors should be approached for their views before any decision is made.

3.7 If a case is rejected by the Committee, a revised case will not normally be accepted for consideration until 12 months have passed since the date on which the rejected case was submitted.

Route 2 (Exceptional circumstances)

3.8 Exceptionally, it may be necessary to consider a case for promotion to chair or readership outside of the standard (Route 1) process. For example, when a member of staff has been offered a chair or readership by another institution and the Provost and Deputy Vice-Chancellor accepts a recommendation from the Dean that an application for a personal title should be considered. Other cases could be considered if they were deemed appropriate by the Vice-Chancellor.

3.9 In all such exceptional cases, the candidate will be interviewed by a Panel similar to that constituted for an equivalently graded established post, in accordance with Appointment Committees Code of Practice (Academic Schools), and references will be taken up from referees nominated by the candidate.  The Appointment Committee, which shall be chaired by the Provost and Deputy Vice-Chancellor, shall have authority to offer such personal title as it sees fit with immediate effect and will report its decision to Senate and Council via the Committee and HRC.

3.10 A submission for consideration through either route should consist of:

  1. A factual CV and publications list.
  2. A statement (no longer than two sides of A4 in 12 point font) prepared in support of their case and setting out how they meet the necessary criteria. This should emphasise the sustained and continuing record of excellence achieved since the candidate’s last promotion.
  3. A statement from the Dean indicating why they support or do not support the application including an assessment of how the candidate meets the criteria and confirmation that the candidate has

a)    Completed a PDR in the preceding 12 months and details of the PDR ratings for the preceding 5 years, where available

b)    Has  a demonstrable record of maintaining good practice in learning and teaching as reflected in the University Framework

c)    Has obtained formal recognition of their professional standing in teaching in accordance with the UK Professional Standards Framework (at least at the level of Fellow of the HEA or equivalent), and, where appropriate, continued ‘good standing’ as specified by the accrediting body.

d)    Contributed to the collegiality of the School and University by assuming and effectively discharging leadership/management responsibilities.

  1. A list of two external referees, nominated by the candidate, none of whom should have been employed by the University within the last 5 years.
  2. [Not required under route 2] A list of three external referees, none of whom should have been employed by the University within the last 5 years, nominated by the Dean, all of whom should have a sound knowledge of the UK HE system. Deans should note that, across the five referees, a mix of national and international referees is preferred and the referees should ideally be based in the most prestigious institutions for the appropriate subject area. The Committee reserves the right to contact additional or alternative referees if it so chooses. 
  3. The list of referees should include contact details and evidence of how the individuals meet the criteria listed in point 5 above.

4.  Personal Circumstances

4.1 In order that due account can be taken of any personal, familial or other non-academic circumstances that may have had an impact on the development of a candidate’s career, candidates have the opportunity to draw to the attention of the Committee any specific issues which they consider relevant, especially those which – since appointment or previous promotion – they consider have had an effect on their career profile and on the volume of their contributions. By this means, the University seeks to ensure that no candidate is placed at a disadvantage in consequence of particular conditions or circumstances.

4.2 In regard to

 (a) Time away from work, e.g. maternity, paternity, parental or adoption leave (with dates - and details of arrangements for return to work following these periods;

(b) Part time work (stating FTE) or other flexible working arrangements, a candidate’s statement may be extended by up to an additional side of A4. Such submissions must be evidence-based and verifiable, but the candidate is not required to supply the actual evidence, unless asked to do so.

4.3 In regard to

 (a) Periods of absence (with dates) or flexible working arrangements or limitations on speed of working arising from caring responsibilities, a disability, ill-health or injury;

 (b) Periods of absence (with dates) or flexible working arrangements arising from the impact and consequences of gender re-assignment;

 (c) Personal, familial or other non-academic circumstances (with details) that have interrupted, restricted or delayed their career, a candidate may choose to either proceed as in 4.2 or to share such information in confidence with a member of their choice of the Committee who will report orally to the Committee.

Appeals

5.  Appeals

5.1 Unsuccessful candidates have the right to appeal, although this is limited to evidence of a substantial defect in the procedure by which a proposal was considered and a decision reached.

5.2 A candidate wishing to appeal may do so in accordance with the appeal stage of the grievance procedure (Ordinance XXXVII).   

5.3 Before convening an appeal hearing, the Director of Human Resources will consult the Chair of the Committee on the eligibility of the appeal (see 5.1).

5.4 The Appeal Committee is able to:

 (a) Reject the appeal

 (b) Refer the case back to the Committee in the event that the Appeal Committee is satisfied that, on the basis of the evidence submitted to the Committee, no  body acting reasonably could have reached a decision such as that recorded.

5.5  The decision of the Appeal Committee is final.

Criteria

Before an application for a personal title will be considered, colleagues should:

  • have completed a PDR in the preceding 12 months.
  • have a demonstrable record of maintaining good practice in learning and teaching as reflected in the University Framework.
  • normally have obtained formal recognition of their professional standing in teaching in accordance with the UK Professional Standards Framework (at least at the level of Fellow of the HEA or equivalent), and, where appropriate, continued ‘good standing’ as specified by the accrediting body.
  • be able to demonstrate they have contributed to the collegiality of the School and University by assuming and effectively discharging leadership/management responsibilities.

Criteria for Promotion to Professor

Candidates for promotion to Professor must have

  1. a sustained and continuing record of excellence, which has contributed to the furtherance of knowledge in their area of activity, and is recognised by an international reputation in that area, and
  2. an ability to stimulate and inspire others as reflected in effective academic leadership and influence within and beyond the University.

Excellence, reputation, leadership and influence may be demonstrated through the following areas: research; teaching and associated educational development; enterprise including innovation and knowledge exchange. Public engagement activities may feature in all cases.  

Applications are encouraged from candidates with a profile that extends across more than one area. Where a case is based largely on one area, candidates should also comment in all relevant areas.

Further details of the University’s expectations are set out below. 

Evidence of Excellence and International Reputation

All candidates must provide evidence of

  • A progressive programme of enquiry that is recognised internationally for its originality, significance and rigour
  • Associated with this programme, a record of academic outputs of an excellent quality, as judged against international norms
  • An established profile in his/her area(s) of activity, which is recognised within and beyond the University, and confirmed through international peer review.

In research relevant additional evidence would include:

  • Significant recognition in his/her discipline demonstrated by, for example, prestigious awards and invitations, positions of responsibility within the research community, an excellent public citations profile set in the context of their discipline or by other means.

In teaching and educational development relevant additional evidence would include:

  • Significant recognition in the pedagogy of their discipline demonstrated by, for example, prestigious awards and invitations from national/international bodies with responsibility for educational quality and enhancements, an excellent public citations profile which is benchmarked appropriately
  • A sustained record of practice that is research-informed, is creative, adaptable to changing circumstances and has led to highly effective student learning
  • A record of performance in teaching that is demonstrably and consistently excellent.

In enterprise relevant additional evidence would include:

  • A sustained record of innovation linked to outputs that is based on one or both of the following:

i) Knowledge exchange with business, public or voluntary organisations

ii) Commercialisation of academic activity, for example through licensing or through spin-out company or social enterprise formation

  • Founded on these innovations, a record of creating substantial social, cultural or economic impacts.

Evidence of Academic Leadership and Influence within and beyond the University

All candidates must provide evidence of

  • A record of supervising research students to successful and timely completion and, where appropriate, of effectively managing project staff
  • A record of preparing and successfully delivering projects with support from external funding
  • A record of promoting a culture of continuous enquiry within the University, and of advancing the reputation of the University externally.

In research relevant additional evidence would include:

  • A record of obtaining externally funded awards obtained via peer review
  • A record of promoting an active research culture within the University, for example by supporting early career researchers, promoting cross-disciplinary research and encouraging performance of the highest quality among colleagues
  • Contribution to leading debates internationally on research, including through involvement with national and international bodies associated with the research community beyond the University

In teaching and educational development relevant additional evidence would include:

  • A record of initiating and delivering projects in pedagogy, funded externally as appropriate, with a positive impact on student learning
  • A record of championing scholarly practice and innovation in all learning and teaching activities and making a leading contribution to the development of institutional learning and teaching quality and enhancements to the benefit of students and staff
  • A record of significant and continuing professional development activity in learning and teaching, including leadership in the professional development of others
  • Contribution to leading debates nationally/internationally about teaching and learning policy and practices, including through involvement with appropriate national and international bodies

In enterprise relevant additional evidence would include:

  • A record of managing project staff (based in the University or in a collaborating company) to a successful outcome
  • A record of attracting external funding for innovation and knowledge exchange projects, including investment for the formation of new enterprises, and a track record of successful delivery
  • A record of establishing new collaborations with existing business, public or voluntary organisations or the formation of new enterprises
  • A record of inspiring and enabling academic colleagues to engage with business, public and voluntary organisations to create social, cultural or economic impacts
  • Involvement with bodies outside the University, for example those responsible for driving regional and national prosperity.

Criteria for Promotion to Reader

Candidates for promotion to Reader

a) Must have a record of excellence in their specialist area which is recognised internationally

b) May not yet meet the leadership criteria for Professor fully

c) Must be able to provide evidence of a clear trajectory towards achieving all the criteria for promotion to Professor

Candidates are advised to refer to the Framework for Good Practice in Learning and Teaching

 

Contact us

Tel: 01509 222169

Fax: 01509 223903