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

Human Resources

A-Z content

Promotion to Senior Lecturer

Cases for promotion to Senior Lecturer will be considered by the Promotion to Senior Lecturer Committees. A Dean of School may recommend a member of staff for promotion to Senior Lecturer at any time but should be mindful that the committees meet three times a year.

The next scheduled meetings are:

Wednesday 6th September 2017 (deadline for the receipt of applications Thursday 17th August 2017)

Tuesday 30th January 2018 (deadline for the receipt of applications Friday 12 January 2018)

Thursday 24th May 2018 (deadline for the receipt of applications Thursday 3rd May 2018)

Introduction

1.1 Cases for promotion to Senior Lecturer will be considered by one of the Promotion to Senior Lecturer Sub-Committees (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

2.1 An application for promotion to Senior Lecturer may be made by any member of the RTE job family, 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 promotion to Senior Lecturer, 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 in the 'Criteria' section. Further guidance on the criteria can be found in annex 1.

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 case for promotion 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 promotion to Senior Lecturer, they should first consult with the School’s senior management team and other senior colleagues as appropriate.

3.3 In order to assist School senior management teams, candidates are required to provide evidence in written form of their demonstrable record of maintaining good practice in learning and teaching as reflected in the University Framework (see Notes for Guidance). A member of the senior management team will also be required to conduct a review of the quality of the candidate’s outputs. Schools may wish to interview candidates prior to making a decision on the suitability of the candidate.

3.4 If a Dean is content that the candidate satisfies the criteria they should submit a case to the Committee.

3.5 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.

3.6 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.

3.7 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).

3.8 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)

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

3.10 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 shall have authority to offer promotion to Senior Lecturer with immediate effect and will report its decision to Senate and Council via the Committee and HRC.

3.11 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. In preparing their statement, candidates are advised to refer to the criteria for promotion to Senior Lecturer (see Criteria section below) and the Framework for Good Practice in Learning and Teaching  

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 based on the candidate’s written evidence provided in 3.3.
d) Contributed to the collegiality of the School and University by assuming and effectively discharging leadership/management responsibilities.

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– 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, (usually their Dean) who will report orally to the Committee.

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.

Annex 1

This annex provides further guidance to candidates on how the criteria will be interpreted and, in particular, indicates some of the quantitative factors that are likely to come into play.

Output quantity & quality

We would expect to see 10-15 high quality academic outputs (where an output is broadly interpreted as an output suitable for submission to a relevant REF panel, with allowance made for double-weighting), with 5-10 outputs in the last 5 years as part of a recent publication profile that is clearly advancing. Fewer outputs would be accepted where there is clear evidence that those outputs are of especially high quality. In all cases, candidates should provide evidence of the recognition for and quality of their outputs. This might involve, but is not limited to, citation data, outlet metrics such as SNIP, recognised journal listings (e.g. ABS) or monograph publisher information. As described in section 3.3, submissions will include internal peer review of an agreed selection of outputs.

PhD student supervision

We would expect all candidates to have at least 1 PhD completion, with additional ongoing supervisions. Exceptionally and where good reason exists, for example in a submission primarily based on teaching or enterprise, project staff management (e.g. RA supervision) can be considered as an alternative to PhD supervision with 3 years fte successful line management comparable with 1 PhD completion.

All candidates should demonstrate a track record of submitting for external grant income. The amount of grant income that is expected will vary significantly between disciplines. Deans will have access to a target figure per FTE in their School and will be able to provide guidance for an appropriate level to demonstrate excellence in a SL application.

To demonstrate leadership, we would expect to see that a candidate has had the role of PI on a grant, or a lead on a significant work package within a large grant.

Criteria

Before an application for promotion to Senior Lecturer 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
  • 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 Senior Lecturer

Candidates for promotion to Senior Lecturer must have

  1. a record of excellence, which is contributing to the furtherance of knowledge in their area of activity, and is recognised by a growing international reputation in that area
  2. an ability to inspire others as reflected in growing 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 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 programme of enquiry that is becoming 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
  • A profile in his/her area(s) of activity, which is recognised within and beyond the University.
  • Evidence of a clear trajectory towards achievements at a higher academic level.

In research relevant additional evidence would include:

  • Recognition in his/her discipline demonstrated by, for example, awards and invitations from appropriate external bodies; an excellent public citations profile set in the context of their discipline and benchmarked externally at senior lecturer level, or by other means.

In teaching and educational development relevant additional evidence would include:

  • Recognition in the pedagogy of their discipline demonstrated by, for example, awards and invitations from appropriate external bodies; an excellent public citations profile which is benchmarked externally and appropriately at senior lecturer level.
  • A record of engaging in scholarly practice that is research-informed, is creative 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 record of innovation linked to outputs that is based on one or both of the following:
    • Knowledge exchange with business, public or voluntary organisations
    • 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 social, cultural or economic impacts.

Evidence of Academic Leadership and Influence

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
  • Emerging evidence of promoting a culture of continuous enquiry within the University and of advancing the reputation of the University externally.
  • Evidence of a clear trajectory towards achievements at a higher academic level.

In research relevant additional evidence would include:

  • A record of obtaining externally funded awards obtained via peer review
  • Contribution to debates on research, including through involvement with external bodies associated with the research community.

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 contributing to institutional learning and teaching quality to the benefit of students and staff
  • A record of continuing professional development activity in learning and teaching, including supporting the professional development of others
  • Contribution to national debates about teaching and learning policy and practices, including through involvement with appropriate external 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 or knowledge exchange projects, and a record of successful delivery
  • Experience of developing collaborations with business, public or voluntary organisations
  • Experience of engaging academic colleagues with business, public or voluntary organisations to create social, cultural and economic impacts with significant reach
  • Involvement with bodies outside the University, for example those responsible for driving regional and national prosperity.

 

Contact us

Tel: 01509 222169

Fax: 01509 223903