Skip to content | Change text size
 

Staff Development Procedure - Academic Promotion Committees Levels C-E

Parent Policy

Staff Development Policy

Preamble

Promotion at Monash University is based on merit following a thorough and fair process. The University is committed to the principle of equal opportunity in promotion and recognises that staff contribute to its vision and goals in diverse ways. The achievements of candidates for promotion are assessed relative to the particular circumstances of their career progression and the opportunities which have been available to them.

Teaching and research (including education-focused) candidates who satisfy the relevant promotion committee that they meet the criteria for promotion are to be promoted irrespective of considerations such as the increased cost of staffing.

Research-only candidates will be promoted if they satisfy the promotion committee that they meet the criteria for promotion and provided that the relevant grant holder and/or head of unit has confirmed that there is funding available for the promotion.

This procedure applies to committee members who are evaluating applications from candidates who:

  • have a current performance development plan which complies with the requirements of the Performance Development Process: Academic Staff; and
  • are seeking promotion to senior lecturer or senior research fellow, associate professor or professor.

This procedure should be read in conjunction with the Staff Development Procedure - Academic Promotion for Candidates Levels C-E.

Definitions

Academic performance standards: faculty or discipline-specific performance standards for all academic staff against which academic performance will be measured, particularly for the purpose of probation, promotion and performance development. The standards are qualitative, quantitative or a mixture of both across the three key areas of academic activity - research, education and service. They include identified ‘minimum’ performance standards, below which the staff member would be managed for unsatisfactory performance, and ‘faculty expectation’ or aspirational standards, above which the staff member may be eligible for promotion in accordance with the requirements of the Staff Development Procedure - Academic Promotion for Candidates Levels C - E.

Achievement(s) relative to opportunity: is an evaluative framework in which the overall quality and impact of achievements is given more weight than the quantity, rate or breadth of particular achievements. Assessing achievements relative to opportunity involves giving consideration to circumstances, arrangements, career histories and overall time available to the staff member. This in turn allows appropriate evaluation of achievements in relation to:

  • the quantum or rate of productivity,
  • the opportunity to participate in certain types of activities, and
  • the consistency of activities or output over the period of consideration.

Achievement relative to opportunity is a positive acknowledgement of what a staff member can and has achieved given the opportunities available and is not about providing “special consideration” or expecting lesser standards of performance.

Assessor: An expert in the field able to offer a balanced and confidential assessment of the candidate’s standing in the field and of the merits of the application based on stated criteria. Assessors may or may not be known personally to the candidate and should be selected by the Dean.

Campus promotion coordinator: is a designated staff member from MUSC or MSA who has responsibility for coordinating the promotion process for levels B-D for the relevant campus.

Conditional promotion: A conditional promotion means that the committee authorises the chair of the committee to approve the promotion if certain specific criteria are met before 1 May in the following year. A conditional promotion will come into effect on the date that the chair approves the promotion or 1 January in the year following the candidate’s application, whichever is the later.

Education-focused candidate: A candidate for promotion who is an education-focused academic (i.e. his or her primary role is to provide a high standard of learning and teaching, educational design and delivery and educational leadership).

Faculty or Divisional Cluster: refers to a cluster of Faculties and/or administrative Divisions that is serviced by a particular HR Service Hub.

Head of Unit: head of an academic or organisational work unit, for example Head of School, Head of Department or where applicable, a person acting as his or her nominee. If there are no heads of unit within the faculty, a deputy dean or equivalent may be delegated the head of unit’s responsibilities for the academic promotion process. 

HR Business Partner: is a member of Monash HR who operates as a strategic partner responsible for providing a range of human resources services for an assigned Faculty or administrative Division. HR Business Partners are located within a HR Service Hub.

HR Service Hub: is the centre for human resources services and activities within a Faculty or Divisional Cluster.

MSA: Monash South Africa.

MUSC: Monash University Sunway Campus.

Procedural irregularity: refers to where the University has not followed a process that is articulated in this procedure.

Promotion committee: means the relevant committee constituted in accordance with Table 1 in this procedure that is responsible for assessing and determining the promotion application.

Research-only candidate: A candidate for promotion who is employed on a research-only contract of employment and who is appointed to undertake predominately research and research-related activities.

University promotion coordinator: is a designated staff member within the Workforce Policy and Performance team in Monash HR who is responsible for coordinating the promotion process and providing secretarial support for the Professorial Promotion Committee. 

1. Preparation for promotion committee meetings

For Senior Lecturer/Senior Research Fellow and Associate Professor Promotion Committees, the Chair and the dean will ensure the committee includes broad disciplinary representation. For the Professorial Committee, the Chair will ensure the committee includes broad disciplinary representation.

1.1 Preliminary assessment form

A preliminary assessment form will be distributed by the promotion coordinator to committee members prior to the first meeting of the committee.

The purpose of the preliminary assessment is to identify, via the independent assessment of all voting committee members acting separately, those candidates who appear clearly to meet the criteria for promotion and those who do not.  This will assist in streamlining the process of decision making during the actual meeting, allowing more time for discussion of those candidates who fall in the middle band (i.e. about whom there are mixed views).

The relevant promotion coordinator is responsible for ensuring that the preliminary assessment form is completed.

1.2 Briefing to committee members

The relevant promotion coordinator will attend the promotion committee to provide secretarial support and procedural advice to committee members.

Prior to each meeting the promotion coordinator will brief committee members to ensure awareness of:

  • roles and responsibilities of membership of the committee and promotions procedures;
  • equal opportunity in relation to matters that may impact on the assessment of applications from promotion;
  • disciplinary differences;
  • citation indexes, impact factor information, benchmarking data, use of team work, multiple authorship and differences between publishing protocols;
  • different ways of assessing the range of academic activities - quantitative and qualitative (including the academic performance standards);
  • relevant circumstances; and
  • good decision-making process.

1.3 Equal opportunity training

All promotion committees are required to understand and apply the equal opportunity principles of the relevant jurisdiction.

For Australian committees, the chair must ensure that all members are provided with a current copy of the University’s Equal Opportunity Guidelines for Academic Promotion and take reasonable steps to ensure that they have read and understood them.

The Equal Opportunity Guidelines for Academic Promotion are designed to heighten awareness and understanding of circumstances that may be relevant when assessing applications for promotion, for example, family responsibilities.  Unless the chair has previously received or attended equal opportunity training, he or she is required to undertake equal opportunity (EO) online training prior to chairing an academic promotion committee meeting.

All promotion committee members are required to undertake the equal opportunity (EO) online training, with the exception of the external member prior to the commencement of the first committee meeting.

1.4 Gender balance

The chair of the promotion committees must ensure the committee has as close to equal gender representation as reasonably practicable, with a minimum of one-third representation of each gender. 

Gender balance can be facilitated through the dean’s appointees and drawing attention to the aim for gender balance when calling for faculty nominees. In the case of faculty committees, if the chair is unable to meet this requirement, the relevant promotion coordinator will assist by contacting individuals (of the under-represented gender) from a cognate area and provide the faculty with the names of these individuals. 

If in exceptional circumstances, there are no available individuals (of the under-represented gender) from a cognate area, a request by the dean to vary or waive the gender representation requirement may be made to the Provost and Senior Vice-President.  The Provost and Senior Vice-President may approve that request in writing and confirm the composition of the committee.

1.5 Conflict of interest

A committee member must declare to the chair any actual, potential or perceived conflict of interest which may arise as a result of involvement in the promotion process. Examples of potential, actual or perceived conflicts of interest include; a committee member who is supervising or supervised a candidate’s postgraduate studies, or a committee member who is a friend of the candidate as well as a co-worker. If a committee member is uncertain whether an actual, potential or perceived conflict of interest exists, advice should be sought from the chair.

The chair is responsible for ensuring that no declared conflict of interest can influence the outcome of the application and that there can be no reasonable perception that it might have done.  If necessary, the chair will require the committee member to withdraw from the committee, or discussions relating to that candidate only.

1.6 Confidentiality

Confidentiality is required of all persons involved in promotion processes.  The chair will emphasise the importance of confidentiality during her or his welcome and overview. The duty of confidentiality continues after the promotion process has been concluded.

All materials are restricted to those directly involved in the assessment process. At the conclusion of the final meeting, access to materials will be removed, and any materials provided are to be returned to the relevant promotion coordinator.

1.7 Privacy

Information contained within the academic promotion application and interview is used for the purposes of assessing promotion applications.  If the information is to be used for a purpose other than the promotion process, then advice should be sought from the Privacy Officer prior to doing so.

Committee members must take all reasonable steps to protect the personal information contained in the candidate’s application form from misuse, loss, unauthorised access, modification or disclosure.  This includes notes made during the committee meetings and discussions.  Personal information includes information or an opinion (including information or an opinion forming part of a database) that is recorded in any form and whether true or not about an individual whose identity is apparent or can reasonably be ascertained from the information or opinion.

Further information is available on the Privacy at Monash website and the Monash HR Privacy Collection Statement.

2. Application assessment process

2.1 Criteria for promotion

Candidates must satisfy the promotion committee that he or she has:

  • been a sustained high performer at the present level of appointment, at or above the aspirational level of academic performance for the candidate’s current level according to the academic performance standards; and
  • the capacity to perform satisfactorily at the level to which promotion is sought, at least at the ‘minimum’ level of academic performance for that level according to the academic performance standards.

It will normally take a candidate several years at their current level of appointment to develop a track record which demonstrates that the above criteria have been met.

2.2 Weightings

Applications are to be considered on their merits in relation to the criteria for promotion taking into account the weightings selected by the candidate for each of the relevant areas of academic activity.

The purpose of requiring weightings is a recognition of the different strengths of academic staff.  A candidate chooses weightings, within the specified parameters relevant to their academic focus (see Staff Development Procedure - Academic Promotion for Candidates Level C-E), to enable the promotion committee to assess whether he or she meets the criteria for promotion in the particular circumstances of her or his responsibilities and achievements at the current level of appointment.

Committee members should be aware that promotion at Monash focuses on the quality, quantity and impact of achievements in the relevant areas of academic activity rather than workload allocations. For higher levels, Monash also focuses on the applicant’s impact on the discipline at a national and international level.

The committee may vary the weightings of a candidate, if it believes that varying the weightings will assist the candidate in her or his application for promotion. However, neither the Faculty/Campus Associate Professor Committees nor the University Professorial Promotion Committee can recommend that a candidate change her or his application to a special case for promotion.

2.3 Differences between academic disciplines

When assessing whether a candidate has met the criteria for promotion, committee members should be aware that there are differences between academic disciplines, including in the way teaching is delivered and research is undertaken and recognised. Committee members should have an understanding of how these differences relate to applications for promotion. Information about differences between and within academic disciplines can be obtained from a range of people, including the chair, dean, associate dean (research), associate dean (education), Provost and Senior Vice-President, Pro Vice-Chancellor (Research), Pro Vice-Chancellor (Learning & Teaching) or Pro Vice-Chancellor (Academic Performance).

Committees should refer to the following documents for further information about assessing applications for promotion:

  • Information about the responsibilities of teaching and research staff (including education-focused staff) appointed at each academic level; or
  • Information about the responsibilities of research-only staff appointed at each level; and
  • the relevant academic performance standards.

The committee will look at each application holistically, making a balanced judgement on a candidate's case for promotion. The decision of the promotion committee should be informed by, but not determined by, the relevant academic performance standards. All available evidence of a candidates qualitative and quantitative performance will be considered in the committee's deliberations.

The promotion committee should take into account achievements at the previous university or universities of a candidate who moved to Monash from the same level of appointment or higher.

3. Assessor reports

Prior to the first meeting of the promotion committee, the relevant promotion coordinator will request written reports from the assessors listed in each application.

Candidates are required to have the following assessor reports:

Level of ApplicationAssessors
Senior Lecturer/Senior Research Fellow 2
Associate Professor 3 (international assessors)
Professor 4 (with at least 3 of the 4 to be international assessors)

Assessors will be asked to:

  • provide an opinion drawn from their understanding of the achievements expected of an academic at the relevant level in their particular field, including whether the candidate’s work aligns with internationally recognised academic standards in that field;
  • comment on the application submitted (in its entirety) and make an assessment of the candidate's achievements in a specific area of activity in the particular circumstances of the case;
  • indicate the extent of their support for the candidate’s application;
  • indicate whether the candidate would be promoted at their university or institution and, if not, explain why; and
  • at professorial level, comment on the candidates current international reputation in the field.

Assessors will be required to indicate whether or not they have a professional and/or personal relationship with the candidate and if so, the nature of the relationship.

Where a close professional or personal association exists, the report will still be provided to the committee, however, the Chair may seek an additional assessor if he/she deems necessary.

Assessors are nominated by the dean/pro vice-chancellor and president, in consultation with the head of unit. On request, the completed assessor reports may be provided to the dean prior to the dean preparing their reports for the Professorial Promotion Committee. Further requirements regarding assessors are outlined in the Staff Development Procedure – Academic Promotion for Candidates Levels C-E.

The relevant promotion coordinator will make all reasonable efforts to contact the assessors listed in the application.

If the promotion coordinator has not received a report(s), the respective promotion committee cannot disadvantage the candidate when assessing the application.

4. Relevant personal circumstances

Candidates are invited to specify and relevant personal circumstances in their application to facilitate an assessment of his or her achievements relative to opportunity.

Committee members should:

The promotion committee must assess a candidate’s achievements relative to the opportunities available to the staff member whilst ensuring that the indicators of quality have been demonstrated.

5. New information

New information received from a candidate must be in accordance with the Staff Development Procedure - Academic Promotion for Candidates Levels C-E.

New information will be circulated to the committee members, tabled at the relevant committee meeting or presented at interview. Committee members should contact the relevant promotion coordinator as soon as possible if any further candidate information is required beyond the summarised materials presented.

6. Voting

The chair may determine the method of voting, in consultation with committee members.   During the meeting, each voting member of the promotion committee may cast one ‘yes’ or ‘no’ vote. Abstentions are only allowable if a committee member has declared a conflict of interest relating to that candidate. In this case, the chairperson will determine whether the conflict of interest can influence the outcome of the application and will request that the committee member abstains from the discussion of that applicant.

If a committee member abstains from voting, this is to be noted by the promotion coordinator and any view will not considered by the committee as a vote. A candidate will be promoted if a majority of those present and voting cast a ‘yes’ vote.

7. Conditional promotion

Promotion committees may make a conditional promotion decision where the committee believes that the candidate’s case for promotion is ‘borderline’ but that some specified achievements by the candidate before the next promotion round would lead to a clear case for promotion.

Appropriate conditions might include:

  • success in a nationally competitive grant application which has been submitted (but not decided) at the time the promotion committee makes its decision;
  • acceptance by a high-impact refereed journal or a publisher of scholarly monographs of a manuscript submitted at the time the promotion committee makes its decision; and/or
  • results at a specified minimum level of teaching evaluations where those evaluations could not reasonably have been completed at the time the promotion committee makes its decision.

The committee must:

  • precisely define the conditions to be met;
  • communicate these clearly in writing to the candidate; and
  • base the conditions on the appropriate metrics for the level of promotion (senior lecturer/senior research fellow, associate professor, professor).

If the candidate succeeds in meeting the specified conditions before 1 May in the following year, the candidate must provide written evidence that conditions have been met to the relevant promotion coordinator. The chair of the committee will review the documentation to determine if the candidate will be promoted. In the case of a conditional promotion to professor, the dean will review the evidence supplied and provide a recommendation to the chair, via the University promotion coordinator.

If the candidate does not meet the specified promotion conditions before 1 May in the following year, and wishes to reapply for promotion, the candidate will be required to submit a new application for promotion.

The decision of the chair is final and there is no appeal process for conditional promotion.

8. Faculty decision making 

In the case of promotion to senior lecturer, senior research fellow and associate professor, the decision about whether a candidate is promoted rests solely with the faculty or campus senior lecturer promotion committee and the faculty or campus associate professor promotion committee respectively.

9. University decision making

The decision about whether a professorial candidate is promoted rests solely with the University Professorial Promotion Committee.

It is expected that the candidate has the support of the dean, head of unit and performance supervisor in making an application for promotion to professor.

9.1 Report to the University Professorial Promotion Committee

Prior to the University Professorial Promotion Committee meeting, the dean must prepare a report addressing the candidate’s case in the three areas of academic activity. The report should also reference the relevant academic performance standards. The dean will then discuss the report with the candidate and provide the candidate with a copy.

Where a candidate does not agree with the factual information contained within the dean’s individual candidate report, the candidate may comment in writing to the Chair of the Professorial Promotion Committee. The candidate’s comment is for information only and there is no requirement for the dean or the committee to respond.

The dean will also prepare a separate report which ranks the candidates in terms of who has the best case for promotion. The University promotion coordinator will collect these reports and provide them to the University Professorial Promotion Committee.

The merit listing of recommended candidates does not bind the University Professorial Promotion Committee and is confidential. It is not provided at any stage to candidates, whether successful or unsuccessful.

If a faculty has no professorial promotion candidates, the dean must send a short letter to the chair of the University Professorial Promotion Committee to confirm that this is the case and include the following information:

  • why they believe there were no applications; and
  • strategies to improve application rates in the future.

9.2 Interview for deans – professorial candidates

The dean will be interviewed by the University Professorial Promotion Committee. The dean will be familiar with all background material relating to each candidate's case and be prepared to discuss it in detail with the committee.

9.3 Interviews for professorial candidates

All candidates applying for promotion to professor will be interviewed by the University Professorial Promotion Committee.

The interview allows the committee to clarify information contained in the candidate's application or statement of relevant personal circumstances. It also provides an opportunity for candidates to answer questions relevant to their case for promotion.

Candidates unable to attend an interview in person will be provided with an opportunity to be interviewed via an audio-conferencing facility. 

10. Notification of outcomes

The only person who can provide feedback to candidates regarding their application is the chair or a representative appointed by the chair.  All other committee members must refrain from discussing any aspect of the meeting with candidates or any other person.

The chair of the Senior Lecturer/Senior Research Fellow and Associate Professor Promotion committees will inform candidates in writing of the committee's decision within seven working days of its final sitting day.

The chair of the University Professorial promotion committee will inform candidates in writing of the committee's decision within 14 working days of its final sitting day.

The promotion coordinator will provide administrative assistance to the chair by preparing the outcome letters.

Unless a candidate has been offered a conditional promotion, all promotions will take effect from 1 January of the year following the promotion decision.

10.1 Notification of outcomes and support for unsuccessful candidates

Outcome letters for candidates not recommended for promotion must include a summary of the reasons why the promotion was not supported and outline the areas that, in the opinion of the committee, need strengthening before a future application is lodged. The major points to be made in the letter should be determined during the committee meeting.

The chair (or a nominated representative), will be available to meet with unsuccessful candidates and their performance supervisor (at the candidate's request) to discuss the committee's decision. Where relevant, the chair should provide contact details of an appropriate staff member nominated by the committss, to give the candidate additional support, mentoring and guidance on the development of a future application.

Copies of the outcome letters are provided to the performance supervisor, head of unit and the HR Business Partner. The dean will also be copied into the outcome letters for professional candidates.

11. Rehearing

Candidates not recommended for promotion may lodge an application for a rehearing only on the basis that there has been a procedural irregularity substantive enough to result in material disadvantage to the candidate with regards to the committee's decision.

Candidates must seek the advice of the chair of the committee, the dean/pro vice-chancellor and president, or both before lodging an application for a rehearing.

Candidates who choose to lodge an appeal for a rehearing must do so within seven days of being notified of the decision.

For further information on the rehearing process refer to Staff Development Procedure - Academic Promotion Rehearing Process Levels B-E.

12. Committee membership and roles

Table 1 provides the membership and quorum details of the relevant promotion committees.

Committee members must:

  • be at the same level or higher than the level the candidate is applying for;
  • carry out a fair and objective assessment of applications for promotion;
  • not act as advocates for candidates or bring any additional information to the committee about the candidate; and
  • ensure discussion is restricted to matters relevant to the application and avoid making comments of a personal nature.

The chair may appoint additional members to ensure sufficient disciplinary or academic focus expertise, ensuring that the committee size does not become unwieldy.

12.1 Election and appointment of committee members

The members of faculty promotion committees will normally be elected or appointed for a three-year term, with one-third of the membership being subject to election or appointment each year.  Members may be re-elected or reappointed. 

All eligible Australian faculty staff members are to be:

  • included in the election process; and
  • considered for appointment by the dean.

All faculty committees must have:

  • a provision for alternate members; and
  • as far as reasonably possible, equal numbers of elected and appointed members.

Appointments should be made after the election of other members to assist the dean in meeting the gender balance requirements and to provide a spread of representation across academic disciplines and levels.

Where there are insufficient nominations to fill an elected position, the position will be re-advertised if there is time, but otherwise the dean, in consultation with the committee, will fill the position with an appointee, who will be regarded as an elected member for the purposes of a quorum.

All positions on campus promotion committees at MSA and MUSC are appointed.

12.2 Applications to senior lecturer/senior research fellow or associate professor from Berwick or Peninsula

Where an application is received from a candidate who is located at the Berwick or Peninsula campuses, the dean may appoint a member from the relevant campus to the promotion committee, but is not obliged to do so.

Members appointed or co-opted to a committee under the provisions related to representation of the Berwick or Peninsula campuses are appointed for one year only.

12.3 Applications from candidates not located in faculties

In the case of non faculty-based Australian staff applying for promotion to senior lecturer or associate professor, candidates will nominate the most relevant faculty to assess their application for promotion, subject to the agreement of the dean of that faculty. Applications are then submitted to the faculty promotion coordinator for consideration by the faculty promotion committee most relevant to the candidate’s discipline/area. Associate dean reports are also required.

Non faculty-based staff from MUSC or MSA who seek to apply for promotion to senior lecturer/senior research fellow or associate professor will nominate the most relevant faculty for the purposes of providing associate dean reports, subject to the agreement of the dean. Applications will be considered by the relevant campus promotion committee.

To ensure sufficient expertise for non-faculty based applications, the relevant promotion coordinator on behalf of the dean/pro vice-chancellor and president will ask the relevant Deputy or Pro Vice-Chancellor to nominate a representative from his or her portfolio to attend the committee as a full voting member for deliberation relating to that candidate only.

Professorial candidates from non faculty areas will nominate the most relevant faculty for the purposes of providing associate dean and dean reports, subject to the agreement of the dean.

12.4 Applications from education-focused candidates

For education-focused applications, the Committee must co-opt an education focused expert to the committee. This will be the Pro Vice-Chancellor (Learning and Teaching) or nominee. This member will be a full voting member for deliberation relating to education-focused candidates only.

12.5 Professorial promotion committee

The Provost and Senior Vice-President, as chair, must appoint four professors of the University to serve on the Professional promotion committee. The University promotion coordinator will liaise with the Deans for suitable nominees to be presented to the provost for approval.

The Provost and Senior Vice-President may co-opt one or more professors whether at Monash or elsewhere to be members of the committee for the purposes of improving representation or ensuring sufficient disciplinary or academic focus expertise.

Deputy deans are advised not to participate as University Professorial Promotion Committee members to ensure that are available to act as proxy for the dean at interview, if required.

13. Inquorate or improperly constituted committees

Where a senior lecturer/senior research fellow or associate professor committee is inquorate or improperly constituted, in order not to disadvantage a candidate the Provost and Senior Vice-President may use his or her discretion to either validate the relevant committee decision or require that a quorate or properly constituted committee consider the application.

In the case of the University Professorial Promotion committee, an inquorate committee must not proceed.

If the Provost and Senior Vice-President becomes unexpectedly unavailable on the day of a committee meeting the committee should determine whether to proceed or reschedule the meeting to a date when the Provost and Senior Vice-President is available. Where the committee decides to proceed, the chair will be nominated by the Provost and Senior Vice-President.

Responsibility

Provost and Senior Vice-President: as the chair of the University Professorial Promotion Committee, the Provost and Senior Vice-President is responsible for ensuring that the committee members carry out a fair, confidential and objective assessment of applications for promotion.

Dean/Pro Vice-Chancellor and President (Monash South Africa/Sunway Campus Malaysia): as the chair of the Faculty/Campus Senior Lecturer Promotion Committee and the Faculty/Campus Associate Professor Promotion Committee, the dean/Pro Vice-Chancellor and President is responsible for ensuring that committee members carry out a fair, confidential and objective assessment of applications for promotion. The dean is also required to provide a written report to the University Professorial Promotion Committee addressing each professorial candidate’s case for promotion.

Head of Unit and Performance Supervisor: the candidate’s performance supervisor and head of unit are required to each provide a report that forms part of the academic promotion application form. If there are no heads of unit within the faculty, a deputy dean or equivalent may be delegated the head of unit’s responsibilities for the academic promotion process.

Associate Deans: the associate deans responsible for education and research in a faculty are required to provide a report on the candidate’s case for promotion in the relevant area of academic activity.   

Candidate: is responsible for complying with requirements of this procedure and providing timely and accurate information to the performance supervisor, head of unit, relevant promotion coordinator and promotion committees.

Related procedures

Related documents

Forms

Version number 6.0
Effective date: 26 February 2014
Procedure owner: Executive Director, Monash HR
Procedure author: Director Workplace Relations
Contact:
  • Ask.Monash
  • Or phone Human Resources on 990 20400

Table 1: Membership of Faculty, Campus and University Promotion Committees

Refer part 12.

Campus Committees (MSA and MUSC)

Senior Lecturer Committee Associate Professor Committee
  • Chair: Pro Vice-Chancellor and President (or nominee) 
  • dean (or nominee)
  • a member of the relevant campus appointed by the Chair
  • at least one faculty member appointed by the dean
  • at least one external member appointed by the Chair. This person should be an academic staff member from another school, faculty or university.

 

Additional co-opted members as required:

  • non-faculty application representative
  • education-focused expert.

 

  • Chair:  Pro Vice-Chancellor and President (or nominee)  
  • dean (or nominee)
  • Provost and Senior Vice-President (or nominee)
  • President, Academic Board (or nominee)
  • a member of the relevant campus appointed by the Chair
  • two faculty members appointed by the dean.

 

Additional co-opted members as required:

  • non-faculty application representative
  • education-focused expert.

 

Quorum: four members of whom three include the chair, dean (or nominee) and a faculty member. Additional co-opted members as required.

Quorum: four members comprising the chair, dean (or nominee), a faculty member and either the Provost and Senior Vice-President (or nominee) or President, Academic Board (or nominee). Additional co-opted members as required. 

The relevant promotion coordinator attends committees to provide administrative and procedural support.


Faculty Committees

Senior Lecturer CommitteeAssociate Professor Committee
  • Chair: dean, acting dean or deputy dean (or nominee)
  • at least two members, elected by and from those academic staff who hold a full-time appointment or fractional appointment of not less than 0.4
  • at least two members of the academic staff of the faculty appointed by the dean
  • at least one member external to the faculty nominated by the dean. This person could be a University staff member from a different faculty.

 

Additional co-opted members as required:

  • non-faculty application representative
  • education-focused expert.
  • Chair: dean or acting dean (or nominee)
  • Provost and Senior Vice-President (or nominee)
  • President, Academic Board (or nominee)
  • At least two members, elected by and from those academic staff who hold a full-time appointment or a fractional appointment of not less than 0.4
  • at least two members of the academic staff of the faculty appointed by the dean.

 

Additional co-opted members as required:

  • non-faculty based application representative
  • education-focused expert

Quorum: four members comprising the chair, external member and at least one appointed and one elected member. Additional co-opted members as required.

Quorum: five members comprising the chair, at least one appointed and one elected member and the Deputy Vice-Chancellor/nominee and President Academic Board/nominee. Additional co-opted members as required.

The relevant promotion coordinator attends committees to provide administrative and procedural support.

University Committee

University Professorial Committee 
  • Chair: Provost and Senior Vice-President
  • Pro Vice-Chancellor (Research)
  • Pro Vice-Chancellor (Learning and Teaching)
  • Pro Vice-Chancellor (Academic Performance)
  • President, Academic Board; and
  • four professors of the University appointed by the Provost and Senior Vice-President

Quorum: five members of the full professorial committee, including at least two of the following:

  • Pro Vice-Chancellor (Research)
  • Pro Vice-Chancellor (Learning and Teaching)
  • Pro Vice-Chancellor (Academic Performance); or
  • President, Academic Board.

The relevant promotion coordinator attends committees to provide administrative and procedural support.