Academic Promotion Guidelines For Committees: Education-Focused Candidate Applications Levels B-E

This document should be read in conjunction with: Academic Promotion, Information for Committee Members and the Staff Development Procedure - Academic Promotion Committees Levels C-E.

About Education-focused staff

Monash University recognises that excellence in learning and teaching is vital to its success in transforming the lives of students.  Education-focused staff are outstanding educators committed to high-quality student experiences and outcomes.  

The promotion process is available to education-focused academic staff members in order to recognise and reward their commitment to learning and teaching excellence.

In considering a candidate’s case for promotion, committee members should be mindful that an education-focused staff member’s primary role is to provide a high standard of learning and teaching, educational design and delivery and educational leadership.  

Criteria for promotion for Education-focused candidates

Education-focused candidates are expected to meet all of the University’s academic performance standards, exceptthe quantitative research standards (i.e. the faculty or discipline-specific research metrics). Candidates are required to satisfy the relevant promotion committee that he or she has:

• been a sustained high performer at the present level of appointment, at or above the ‘faculty expectation’ 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.

Evaluating an Education-focused candidate’s application

Education-focused candidates are advised to place significantly greater emphasis on teaching, and learning and teaching scholarship, with a consequent reduction in expectations for disciplinary research.  Education-focused candidates for promotion are required to allocate weightings of:

• a maximum of 85% for education, with a particular emphasis on educational design and delivery and educational leadership;
• a  minimum of 5% for research; and
•  a set 10% for service.

Committee members are encouraged to assess the candidate’s contribution in learning, teaching and the scholarship of learning and teaching and focus on the candidate’s impact on the learning and teaching environment.  The assessment will be based on the written applications submitted by candidates.  Committee members should also take into account the reports and comments provided in the candidate’s application including reports from referees, assessors, associate deans, the performance supervisor and head of unit. 

Assessing Qualitative and Quantitative Performance Standards

In assessing the candidate’s application for promotion, committee members should refer to the Academic Performance Standards as outlined below.

Quantitative Education Performance Standards

The rating scale for Unit Evaluation Median Satisfaction Score is:

• ≥ 4.70 Outstanding
• 3.60-4.69 Meeting Aspirations
• 3.01-3.59 Needing Improvement
• ≤ 3.00 In Need of Critical Attention

Overall satisfaction median of 3.6 or greater is the endorsed minimum quantitative standard for education for all Monash academic staff who teach and the aspirational quantitative performance standard is the overall satisfaction median of 4.7 or greater.

Committee members should be aware that Education-focused candidates are expected to have consistently good teaching evaluations.

Qualitative Education Performance Standards

University qualitative education indicators are connected with examples of evidence and academic levels or level bands and are aligned with the Australian Learning and Teaching Council’s (ALTC) criteria for teaching excellence, specifically:

1. approaches to the support of learning and teaching that influence, motivate and inspire students to learn;
2. development of curricula, resources and services that reflect a command of the field;
3. approaches to assessment, feedback and learning support that foster independent learning;
4. respect and support for the development of students as individuals; and
5. scholarly activities and service innovations that have influenced and enhanced learning and teaching.

Approaches to learning and teaching that influence, motivate and inspire students to learn. 

The Committee should look for examples of how the candidate influences, motivates and inspires students to learn.  For example, does the candidate refer to examples of his/her own teaching practice that will provide the committee members with insight into the candidate’s approach, experiences and tasks?  Is there a strategy for teaching large classes and/or motivating diverse student cohorts in terms of mixed ability and cultural differences?  Is there evidence from students that outline the positive impact of a course/unit on them as learners? Does the candidate recognise the needs of students in terms of skill development and how positive attitudes to the subject have been encouraged?

Development of curricula, resources or services that reflect a command of the field.

For this criterion, committee members should consider the candidate’s contribution to reviewing, writing or redesigning a new unit, course or a learning or teaching resource.  Is there evidence of innovative curriculum design (e.g. a national or international trend in the field)?  Are the materials adopted nationally or internationally?  Committee members should assess whether the candidate has contributed to curriculum reform at school and faculty level.  Has the candidate developed learning resources, written a textbook, etc?  Has the candidate made use of technologies to encourage successful engagement with learning? Is the design of the learning activities and assessment tasks appropriate?  Are there opportunities for students to engage with contexts outside of the classroom (e.g. industry visits, excursions)?

Approaches to assessment, feedback and learning support that foster independent learning.

Consider how the candidate has outlined their approach to assessment, feedback and learning. Is there evidence that a variety of assessment methods have been adopted?  Is there evidence that processes have been established to foster independent learning?  Has the candidate described the nature of their assessment tasks? Has the candidate ensured consistency across different cohorts?  How have the marks been moderated?  How have assessment tasks been vetted?  Have standards, policies or procedures been developed?

Respect and support for the development of students as individuals.

Consider how the candidate has supported the development of students, including how they responded to sensitive or individual needs and perspectives.  Is there evidence of mentoring, guidance or special support programs?  Has the candidate explored student support services such as Peer Assisted Study Sessions, or developed and implemented Peer Assisted Learning? Has the candidate developed and implemented mechanisms and support structures that enhance the learning outcomes of a cohort?

Scholarly activities that have influenced and enhanced learning and teaching*.

*Please note that in assessing an application for promotion to levels B and C, proportionately  less emphasis should be placed on this indicator.

Committee members should assess whether the candidate has contributed to higher education innovation at school, university, disciplinary, national or international level, (for example, presenting at a seminar, workshop or conference on an aspect of their teaching of their discipline at a national/international level).  Look for evidence of papers published in journals, books, grants, contributions to standards settings, involvement in accreditations, presentations, development of resources for others. What type of activities has the candidate engaged in to continuously improve their teaching?  Has the candidate led the development of a new policy, procedure or guideline in learning and teaching?

Qualitative Research Performance Standards

Committee members should judge the candidate’s qualitative research performance standards based on pedagogical research and teaching and learning scholarship.

While a minimum of 5% research weighting is required, committee members should be aware that it is expected that the amount of research conducted by education-focused staff members will escalate as they are promoted through the levels. At Associate Professor and Professor level, for example, education-focused academics are expected to be making a national and/or international contribution to best practice higher education innovation which would require a greater emphasis on educational research (generally a weighting of 20 to 30%).

Research undertaken by education-focused staff should be educational in nature and focus, even when discipline-related. In some cases, candidates may not have a significant track record of educational research (for example, candidates who have recently been converted into an education-focused role).  In such cases, candidates may refer to their disciplinary research. However candidates are expected to have clearly demonstrated that their pedagogical research is on an upward trajectory in his or her case for promotion.

Education Focused Roles – summary of indicative requirements.

The following diagram summarises the educational and research requirements of an education-focused candidate by level.

Further Information

For further information about the Monash University academic promotion process, visit the Academic Promotion website.