PROCEDURE FOR APPOINTMENT TO ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR
CONTENTS
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
INTRODUCTION
PURPOSE
ARRANGEMENTS
DEFINITION
TIMELINES
Appendix 1
Appendix 2
1
Summary of informal consultation
Frequently asked questions
INTRODUCTION
The introduction of the Associate Professor title follows the introduction of the new
UWE Academic. The new UWE Academic recognises the value of all academic
endeavour including teaching, research, knowledge exchange, professional practice,
academic leadership and management.
The Associate Professor title will enable the University to recognise significant
achievements by staff in all aspects of the University’s work.
The Associate Professor title replaces the Reader title. Whilst the Reader title
recognises prowess in research, the Associate Professor title recognises prowess
and achievement across a wider academic field.
The introduction of the Associate Professor title also supports the wish to offer
broader career pathways for academic and research staff.
This procedure has been developed following wide ranging informal consultation with
managers and academic staff; this generated significant positive feedback about
introducing the title. A summary of the informal consultation exercise is contained in
Appendix 1.
2
PURPOSE
This document outlines the procedures to be followed for the establishment of the
Associate Professor role and award of the title.
3
ARRANGEMENTS
The following arrangements will apply for the award of the Associate Professor title:
a) Individuals awarded the title will normally be in Grade I posts.
b) The Associate Professor title will not entitle the individual to participate in the
Professorial Merit Pay scheme
c) The award of the Associate Professor title will not lead to a change of pay.
Version 1 – 30 September 2011
1
All current Readers would be eligible for consideration to become Associate
Professors. This would be a desk-based exercise (conducted by a peer group of
Associate Deans) drawing upon the papers submitted for the recent review of the
Professors and Readers (but with recent updates invited).
Associate Professors would be expected to progress into a professorial role.
Achievement of this could be within 3 to 5 years, although this would depend on the
approval of a professorial role being necessary within a Department, Faculty or
Centre, and would be made via the submission of a business case written and
supported by the Executive Dean.
4
DEFINITION
The UWE Associate Professor will be defined by their growing distinction, standing
and leadership in their chosen subject area, discipline or practice.
Associate Professor titles will be awarded for excellence in teaching and learning,
knowledge exchange, business development, and research. Associate Professor
titles will therefore be awarded to recognise a range of academic achievement
including:
Providing definable leadership within a department
Promoting innovative teaching leadership
Providing academic leadership in an aspect of applied or user-led research or
public engagement
With the support of senior staff, Associate Professors will contribute towards the
maintenance and enhancement of the University’s reputation for one aspect (or a
combination) of UWEs research, knowledge exchange, teaching and scholarship
through their contribution to the collective endeavours and through their own
research, external engagement and teaching.
Associate Professors will make a significant contribution towards the development of
one aspect (or a combination) of UWE’s research, teaching, learning, knowledge
exchange strategy, policy and its development within the faculty and University in line
with KPIs and objectives
Associate Professors will support academic development and excellence in research,
professional practice, teaching and learning, and/or other aspects of knowledge
exchange or knowledge transfer.
5
TIMELINE
November 2011 - Publish paper to current Readers and invite applications from
Readers and invite Faculty Executive teams to submit any additional individuals (i.e.
not currently ‘Readers’) at ‘I’ grade to be considered for the title.
January 2012 – Research Review and Progression Panel (RRPP) reviews
applications, awards titles and provides feedback on applications.
Version 1 – 30 September 2011
2
Appendix 1
SUMMARY OF CONSULTATION ON ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR
1. Copy of invitation sent to a selection of UWE’s Professors, Readers and
Teaching Fellows
Dear
I wanted to draw upon your experience as a UWE Professor/ Reader/NTF to
ask your opinion about a project that the VCE group is considering / I am
writing to a selection of UWE’s Readers to ask your opinion about a project
that the VCE group is considering, namely a proposal to introduce the title of
‘Associate Professor’
A number of UK HEIs offer Associate Professor posts (Warwick,
Bournemouth, for example). The UWE proposal has emerged for a number of
reasons:
- Reader is not widely recognised on the international stage;
- Associate Professor would be regarded as the preparatory stage before
progression onto a full professorship, which may be a 3-5 years development
period, however this progression is not guaranteed and would have to be
backed by an academic business case stating the need for a full professorial
post and role at this level;
- ‘Associate Professor’ title would normally, but not always, equate to the UWE
‘I’ grade; there would be no change in current salary; the role would not be
part of the Professorial merit scheme;
- The key criteria for Associate Professor in any aspect of research, teaching
and learning, or some aspect of KE, is that they have peer-reviewed record
and evidence of innovation and distinction on a national stage.
It may be more straightforward to consider Associate professor in Research
but the VCEg also wants to create some opportunity for growing excellence in
teaching and in KE. One proposal for recognising innovation and prowess in
teaching and learning or KE would be:
"The minimum expectation to become Associate Professor through innovative
practices in teaching and learning is that the individual will have made an
estimable contribution across our own institution, which has led to an impact
on a national stage. This could be evidenced for example by: national standing
as a ‘National Teaching and Learning Fellow’, lead role in Higher Education
Academies, lead role in a PSB or through institutional audit etc. Furthermore
they will be expected to have contributed to the critical debates in higher
education pedagogies, quality assurance, educational management through
invitations to conferences, peer-reviewed invitations and publications and
other evidence of esteem. Their CV will already contain evidence of
recognition, benefit and influence on the national stage.
Version 1 – 30 September 2011
3
Individuals with a strong focus on other aspects of the UWE academic – those
engaged for example in high level business development and delivery,
community or public engagement, innovations in work-based or technologyenhanced learning could also be eligible for consideration as Associate
Professor where they meet the criteria for national influence and (if it is a new
post) where there is an express need for a post at that level, which is
supported and funded by a faculty through a robust and sustainable case."
The proposal has been well received at VCEg and is being worked up by HR.
Do you have a view? I am asking a number of our experienced professors for
their opinion and would welcome a response either by email or ‘phone by June
13th 2011. It would also help us if you could indicate if you would be willing to
mentor and develop such individuals to build capacity and capability.
Many thanks
Paul Gough
2. List of Readers at UWE, as at Feb 2011
FBL
Position
Booth
Reader in Strategy and Organisation
Cicmil
Reader in Global Operations
French
Pool Reader in Organisation Studies
Guermat
Reader in Finance
Hughes
Reader in Applied Marketing
Razzaque
Reader in Law
Rumney
Reader in Law
Ryder
Reader
Wong
Reader Financial Risk Management
ACE
Bould
Reader in Film and Literature
Dresser
Reader
Esser
Reader
Fedorowich
Pool Reader in British Imperial History
Greer
reader
Harnett
Reader
Version 1 – 30 September 2011
4
Mulvey-Roberts
Pool Reader in Literary Studies
Ollerenshaw
Reader in History
Richards
Reader in History
Spicer
Pool Reader in Cultural History
Swanson
Pool Reader
Thompson
Reader in Political Theory
Tincknell
Reader
Van Den Anker
Reader
FET
Avineri
Reader in Travel Behaviour
Baker
Reader
Coveney
Reader
Goodwin
Lambert
Reader
Nouri
Reader in Electrical Power and Energy
Quinn
Reader in Hydrology & Water Management
Sendova-Franks
Reader in Biometry & Animal Behaviour
Smith
Reader in Artificial Intelligence
Smith
Reader-Comp Simulation & Machine Vision
HLS
Albarran
Reader in Critical Care Nursing
Alford
Pool Reader
Arnold
Reader in Molecular Plant Pathology
Clarke
Reader in Sexuality Studies
Cramp
Reader in Muscular Skeletal Health
Evans
Reader in Applied Policy Research
Fletcher
Reader - Children's Nursing
Hancock
Pool Reader
Harcourt
Reader in Health Psychology
Hunt
Pool Reader in Sociology
Ladomery
Reader in Biomedical Research
Malson
Reader in Psychology
Version 1 – 30 September 2011
5
McCalley
Pool Reader in Separation Science
Moule
Director Ctre for Learning & Wrkfrce Res
Orme
Dir of centre for Public Health Research
Percy-Smith
Reader in Participatory Practice
Pollock
Reader in Epidemiology
Pontin
Director of Graduate School
Powell
Reader in Health Economics
Reynolds
Reader in Biosensing Research
Rhodes
Reader in Cellular Pathology
Taylor
Reader in Sociology
Willey
Reader
3.Respondents (alphabetic order, does not relate to numbering system used
above)
Professor Gay Attwood, Associate Dean
Dr Erel Avineri, Reader in Travel Behaviour
Professor Martin Boddy, Associate Dean
Charles Booth, Reader in Strategy and Organisation
Professor Jacky Brine, Professor of EU Education Policy
Dr. Madge Dresser, Reader in History
Dr Ana Sendova-Franks, Reader in Biometry & Animal Behaviour
Dr Diana Harcourt, Reader in Health Psychology
Dr Penelope Harnett, National Teaching Fellow
Professor Stephen Hoskins, Hewlett Packard Professor of Fine Print
Dr Tim Hughes, Reader in Applied Marketing
Professor David James, Professor of Education
Professor Julie Kent, Professor of Sociology
Dr John Lanham, Associate Dean, FET
Professor Ursula Lucas, National Teaching Fellow
Professor Glenn Lyons, Associate Dean
Professor Julie McLeod, AVC
Professor Robin Means, Associate Dean
Dr Lesley Moore, National Teaching Fellow
Dr Marie Mulvey-Robert, Reader in Literary Studies
Dr Richard O'Doherty, AVC
Professor Nicholas O’Regan, Professor of Strategy/Enterprise and Innovation
Dr Darren Reynolds, Reader in Bio-Sensing Research
Professor Anthony Rhodes, Centre for Research in Biosciences
Professor Nichola Rumsey, Co-Director, Centre for Appearance Research,
4. A synopsis of responses received during the informal consultation period
4.1 During May, June and July 2011, opinions were sought from 12 UWE professors
(4 of whom had experience of the UWE Professorial Committee; 3 of whom were
Version 1 – 30 September 2011
6
also AVCs) and 13 staff at the former PL / new ‘I’ grade, of whom 7 are currently
Readers. All the UWE National Teaching Fellows were asked to express a view. Full
and thorough responses were had from all constituencies – a total of 7,899 words of
opinion, which is summarized here.
4.2 The proposal had already been discussed at length with the Associate Deans
(RKE), with Ian Apperley and Pam Fitzsimmons, and had been aired at VCEg.
a) Level of support
Notwithstanding a number of detailed questions (which will follow) there was
overwhelming and unanimous support for the new designation, for example:
‘I see that Associate Professor offers a wider ranging academic title than that
of Reader which is much more closely tied to research… The title of Associate
Professor would offer high status recognition and a clear progression route
through the identified 3 main fields and the different contributions made to the
university.’ (Respondent 1, hereafter R1, R2, etc)
‘I would welcome this proposal since I believe that neither excellence in
teaching nor knowledge exchange are widely recognised by the university
which considering that students select universities by the quality of their
teaching is regrettable.’ (R2)
‘An excellent idea - after the restructure we are a bit lost with no principal
position and as you quite rightly point out readership is becoming a lost
concept.’ (R4)
‘Along with an appropriate 'career framework' [Associate Professor] could
actually help maximize the potential of the "knowledge capital" that exists
across UWE. Whether this knowledge capital is associated with Teaching &
Learning, Research/KE or Business Engagement to align the title Associate
Professor along with a UWE-wide framework that recognizes excellence
across these areas is desperately needed if UWE is to retain and further
develop the fantastic talent that is has…. It would also represent a new way
(modern way) of doing things and perhaps better place us to capitalize and
develop the talent that UWE has.’ (R21)
b) A number of observations were made by several staff:
-
-
-
-
‘Reader’ has limited recognition internationally (although one respondent
queried this and another suggested that the Associate Professor title did hint
at 'Americanisation.' (R7) Another warned that we should be clear about how
this would be read by comparable institutions in the Anglophone world. (R14)
It offered what one respondent described as ‘high status recognition and a
clear progression route through the identified three main fields and the
different contributions made to the university.’ (R1)
Another observed: ‘I feel that there is a strong level of expectation among
academics worldwide that the title of Associate Professor should reflect Indepth understanding the academic specialism.’ (R12)
A number of staff replied that the new title would recognize high standing and
Version 1 – 30 September 2011
7
achievement in areas other than research, namely teaching/learning, business
development, and other aspects of knowledge exchange (though several
respondents thought there would need to be a differentiator of some sort in the
title. This is covered in the recommendations).
c) One respondent (R2) argued forcibly that they ‘would welcome this proposal since
I believe that neither excellence in teaching nor knowledge exchange are widely
recognised by the university which considering that students select universities by
the quality of their teaching is regrettable.’ Although there was at least one concern
that ‘KE and Teaching & Learning may be regarded as of equivalent value in an
academic portfolio… but I'm not convinced that this is case across the sector and in
so far as external recognition is important’. (R3)
d) One of the most convincing arguments stated that if UWE wanted to be outward
facing, externally focused and committed to partnership it was important that staff
titles ‘conjure useful meanings!’ (R9) ‘Reader’ was unintelligible to many professional
audiences; and was seen as being ‘locked’ in the discourses of research.
e) Urgency was also mentioned: ‘…in my view we should do it asap. It could be a
hugely symbolic move that could be catalyst for the new culture that is needed.’ (R4,
R11, R13) One current Reader urged: ‘the quicker this can be implemented the
better.’ (R17) Another wrote: ‘I think it is excellent that … the Executive are thinking
about a new promotion path for academic staff at UWE. My view is that this is
urgently needed.
f) Amongst the current Readers there was a strong sense that high level enquiry
measured through peer-reviewed processes must be at the core of ‘anyone who gets
to this level even though their energies may be progressively invested more into
teaching/other forms of educational innovation.’ This was considered essential to
ensure such decision makers have experience of and an appreciation for the
academic/intellectual process associated with their discipline(s) and the ways
intellectual integrity might be maintained in an increasingly market-driven
environment.’ (R14)
5 Questions and issues raised by respondents
5.1 Criteria
Just as UWE has criteria for the research dimension of the Professorial title so there
needs to be a common criteria for the Associate professor title with regard influence,
innovation, and distinction on the national stage; this would need to be supported by
evidence and references. (Raised by all respondents). Partnerships needs to be
better embedded in our criteria. (R19)
5.2 National Standing
Several respondents (R3, R8, R12, R16) asked if there was a tension in the question
asked, namely ‘Reader’ is not recognized internationally, and yet all the criteria point
to national standing. One current Reader commented that ‘some level of international
excellence if not international leadership (to use some of the REF terms)’ was
already desirable at Reader. (R15) There was a recognition though that it was more
Version 1 – 30 September 2011
8
difficult, but not impossible, to have markers for international recognition in teaching
and learning or KE.
5.3 Business Case
Since the recent restructuring has in effect appeared to emphasise business
principles as the primary basis for any new appointment, is there a tension between
the new designation of Associate Professor and the means of rewarding personal
achievement/progression? (R3, R6, R13) Associate Deans commented on the
danger of ‘offering a carrot’ but not having the tools to measure high value and
esteemed teaching, curriculum innovation, pedagogic innovation etc. (R20)
5.4 Clarity of title (and sub-designation)
Several respondents were concerned that different sets of criteria would be needed
for the different aspects of the Associate Professor role, and that this might engender
inequities (R3, R4). However, UWE’s current Professorial appointment process
already allows for different routes towards achieving professorial standing. A number
of respondents (R3, R6) suggested Associate Professor (Research) or Associate
Professor (Teaching) or other such clarification that reflected the specifics of each
person's area of expertise (This might also be reflected in Associate Professor in
Teaching and Learning, or Associate Professor in Knowledge Exchange).
5.5 Progression
One respondent was concerned (R3) that the deletion of a clear Research Career
pathway might actually make it more difficult for women to progress in research. If
the criteria for promotion to Associate Professor were to be too wide ranging
(including Research, KE, Teaching and Learning) this might actually dilute the
importance attached to Research for academic career progression. It was suggested
that this could potentially conceal gender differences in relation to research careers.
(We will deal with this by monitoring gender and ethnicity of applicants and
successful for the Associate Professor title).
5.6 Relevance
One respondent suggested that the title could have more meaning if there is a
process that current Readers and faculties need to satisfy. It was suggested that
Readers may not be interested in making an application as there is no financial
reward and they have recently been through a review exercise. The prevailing mood
was that having gone through a recent review the transfer should be light touch but
still rigorous.
5.7 Mentoring
All respondents, when asked, said they would be happy and willing to mentor and
support colleagues, though many added that becoming a full professor, while
aspirational should not and could not be guaranteed. Leadership was considered a
‘key quality that should be demonstrable at the Readership/Associate Professor
level.’ (R21)
5.8 Process
A common concern expressed by current Readers was the process for transfer to
Associate Professor: ‘would the title of Reader automatically be replaced, or will we
have to go through a process of application/justification? I'd hope we wouldn't, given
Version 1 – 30 September 2011
9
the review processes we've already been through recently.’ (R18) See FAQs.
5.9 Several respondents cautioned against this being merely a change in title. (R21)
‘Any implemented framework should enable ambitious Readers a means by which
they can navigate their way to full Professorial status providing they can demonstrate
appropriate achievements and success in conjunction with a sound academic
business case.’ Respondents stressed the need for developmental opportunities for
staff who deliver and who are successful, so that we do not become an institution
that develops talent for more established or ‘perhaps more ambitious Universities.’
(R21)
Version 1 – 30 September 2011
10
Appendix 2
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
Why is the University introducing the title of Associate Professor?
The introduction of the Associate Professor title follows the introduction of the new
UWE Academic. The new UWE Academic recognises the value of all academic
endeavour including teaching, research, knowledge exchange, professional practice,
academic leadership and management. We now want to create a title that allows us
to recognise significant achievements by staff in all aspects of the university’s work –
teaching and learning, enterprise, partnership, research and knowledge exchange.
‘Reader’ is a recognised title for prowess in research but our staff are involved in and
recognized for a wider range of achievements.
Who will be eligible?
Initially, we will invite all Readers to apply for transfer to Associate Professor. We
would also invite Deans to consider creating a rationale for those staff at the ‘I’ grade
who might meet the criteria for ‘Associate Professors’ in such areas as teaching and
learning, partnership, policy development, business engagement, and enterprise etc.
This will be subject to review by the standing review panel chaired by the DVC
(Academic). External references will be sought.
What information do I need to include in my application?
Following advice from colleagues and following our consultation with the Trades
Union, we wanted the application process to be as light touch as possible. Readers
are invited to draft a short statement of how their current Reader role fits the
definition their proposal for a possible Associate Professor title.
Is there a salary change?
No.
Does the merit pay scheme apply to Associate Professors?
No.
I am a Reader; can I retain my Reader’s title?
The feedback from the consultation exercise was that many current Readers
suggested that ‘Reader’ was an increasingly obscure term, which was poorly
understood in international circles.
We anticipate that most people will want to transfer to the new title and will thus be
awarded it. In the short- to mid-term the title of ‘Reader’ will remain in use but new
posts will be advertised as Associate Professor and we hope all our current Readers
will want to use ‘Associate Professor’ with pride. Many other UK universities use the
title now.
Where appropriate the title of Reader could be used on selective occasions.
Who agrees the title?
The Vice-Chancellor agrees all titles after a recommendation from the Executive
Dean, or nominee. We envisage that an individual with the current title of, for
example, ‘Reader in Travel Behaviour’ would become ‘Associate Professor in Travel
Behaviour’; a ‘Reader in Health Psychology’ would become ‘Associate Professor in
Version 1 – 30 September 2011
11
Health Psychology’. Those whose authority and expertise is based on teaching
prowess, for example as National Teaching Fellows, could become ‘Associate
Professor in Teaching’, or Associate Professor in Work-based Learning’.
Would my line management change?
No, this is a change in title and does not affect any other terms and conditions of
service. Line management, appraisal and PDR would carry on as now.
What is the process for people in grade I or Reader roles to be considered for
Associate Professor?
There are two pathways:
i)
For existing Readers there will be an opportunity to apply for transfer to
Associate Professor.
ii)
For people in other grade I roles faculties would need to submit a business
case for a suitable role to be established before an individual is considered for
an Associate Professor title.
Is there an opportunity for a person at grade H to apply for the title?
No; this would be a promotion, and it carries the entitlement of additional workload
bundles and involves a change in grade. In future, however, faculties can seek
approval for a new Associate Professor post. This would need to be made via a
business case to the Vice Chancellor and would need to be progressed as follows:
The business case for establishing Associate Professor posts (including an
assessment of structural and academic requirements) will normally be made as part
of the annual planning round process with the Vice Chancellor’s Executive Group
(VCEg). In exceptions, individual cases may be considered at other times, but these
would still require VCEg approval.
The business case will need to confirm the purpose of the new post, and how it will
be funded.
The purpose of the new post might relate to one or more of the following:
a need to identify definable leadership within the relevant department
the promotion of innovative teaching leadership
the provision of academic leadership in an aspect of applied or user-led research
or public engagement
Funding for a new post can be derived from one or more of the following:
increased income through student numbers on new courses
sponsorship from an external agency
money earned through externally funded research grants
Faculty cases will be considered within the wider context of the UWE strategic plan.
Executive Deans will therefore be asked to link business cases to academic
leadership and enhancement, and to show how they support strategic growth and
sustainable development.
Version 1 – 30 September 2011
12
The business case should cover therefore:
ACADEMIC NEED: fit with the University’s strategic priorities (including the
UWE Partnership Mission); areas of academic development agreed as part of
faculty / department planning with VCEg; defined research or knowledge
exchange (R or KE) and / or teaching (T) leadership against a funded case.
NEW / INCREASED INCOME: funding streams that will support, or augment
the new role; new or re-attributed student numbers; successful grants;
external R and KE grants; consultancy or other non-HEFCE income;
significant match funding from an external source (for example: private or
industrial sponsorship); research grants, full economic cost (FEC) covered
income streams.
DELIVERY: As part of the business case the Executive Dean (or nominee) will
be asked to quantify and describe a set of personal targets for the post holder.
The business case will be considered by the VCEg. If the case is considered to be
credible, robust and sustainable and necessary to the academic direction of the
sponsoring department or Faculty, the Executive Dean will be asked to develop a
RAF and detailed role specification. If not accepted by VCEg, the case will not go
forward. Feedback will be given to the Executive Dean who can take this back to the
Faculty.
How many workload bundles would I receive as an Associate Professor?
The allocation would be the same as the current arrangements for Reader, that is, 55
bundles.
Version 1 – 30 September 2011
13