Swansea University
Introduction
The University is seeking to improve the academic career pathway as one of the ways of responding to the increasing diversity of imperatives that inform the University’s Mission.
There are a number of drivers for change which include
• the changing fees environment and the importance of the student experience,
• the reduction in public funding,
• the growing diversity of what it means to be an academic,
• the focus in the REF on 3 and 4* research,
• competition from other leading Universities.
To respond to this rapidly changing environment we need a workforce with the differentiated skills necessary to ensure that the University can deliver excellence in research, teaching, learning, and the wider student experience, including outreach and enhanced employability, and also realise its ambition to be a powerhouse for the regional economy and internationally. To do so it will also require skills in both leadership and management of the highest order, distributed throughout the workforce.
The University intends, therefore, to strengthen the academic career pathway to ensure roles that are focussed upon research, or upon teaching, learning, and the wider student experience, or third mission activity, are all appropriately recognised, developed, valued, and rewarded.
The proposals are set out below in outline. This paper seeks to engage stakeholders in a consultation process to inform the next steps
Current Issues
There are a number of issues that the proposed changes will seek to address

Improved recognition for o key managerial and leadership roles in Colleges undertaken by staff whose level of research activity has not been sufficient to achieve Senior Lecturer status o high level performance in teaching and scholarship o high level performance in third mission related activity

Fair promotion systems

Equitable workload balance
Other well regarded Universities including Exeter, Leeds, Lancaster, Southampton, Warwick and York have already developed or are developing parallel career track schemes.

Outline Proposals
1.
There should be a single career structure (the academic career pathway) consisting of alternate routes for progression (consisting of a number of career strands) from grade 8 to grade 11.
2.
The single career structure will provide for essential core criteria and optional enhanced criteria.
3.
Essential core criteria would typically comprise:
•core teaching and scholarship*,
•core research and
•core academic leadership and student support.
4.
Optional enhanced criteria would typically comprise:
• enhanced teaching and scholarship,,
•
•
• enhanced research enhanced academic leadership, student support and internationalisation, innovation and engagement
5.
The career structure would include the following key features:
 A clear developmental career pathway with a number of strands reflecting the range of academic strengths,
 the flexibility to move between career strands
 a new career strand of academic leadership and student support which references the student experience, employability and widening access and internationalisation
 an emphasis on research led teaching
 an improved career strand and criteria for innovation and engagement,
 recognition of pedagogic research,

REF requirements specified only under the enhanced research option.
 national / international reputation to be an enhanced criterion, (rather than a core criterion), below Chair level,
 at Chair level (grade 11), there will continue to be an expectation of an international reputation but this need not be solely in research,
 parity of job titles to reflect equivalent status,
 new profiles will be developed to replace the current academic role profiles to reflect the full range of routes, underpinned by HERA.
* By scholarship we would understand an academic’s mastery of the key literature, research activity or research methodologies relevant to those aspects of the discipline being taught. This would encompass pedagogic research, an awareness of contemporary issues, debates and developments within a discipline and an appreciation of the pedagogic implications of these.

Consultation questions
1.
Should the academic career structures be widened to allow for greater recognition and clarity of routes to promotion for academic staff whose main focus is not research?
2.
Should there be a single integrated career pathway as proposed or should there be separate pathways?
3.
Are the career strand options as set out above appropriate? (Research; Teaching and
Scholarship; Leadership, Student Experience and Internationalisation;, Innovation and
Engagement)?
4.
Should REF eligibility be specified only in the enhanced research career strand?
5.
Should progression through some strands be capped (at say senior lecturer level)?
6.
Should recognition at an international level remain a feature of appointment at Chair level?
7.
Should job titles be uniform for all academic staff at each grade e.g. should all academic staff involved in teaching at grade 8 be called “Lecturer”, rather than “Tutor” ?
8.
Should all those appointed at Chair level (grade 11) by whatever route have the title
“Professor” or should another title be given if there is an emphasis on for example innovation and engagement or leadership? (Other Universities use a variety of titles, such as Associate Professor, Director of Education or Director of Enterprise.)
Next steps
The following next steps are proposed.

Consultation with Key Stakeholders to take place November 2011- January 2012 o Consultation with senior stakeholders o Discussion with UCU and the lecturer’s association o Discussion at staff meetings in Colleges o Discussion at key Committees (Senate, HR Policy Committee, Academic
Staffing Committee, Management Board)
 Analysis of consultation findings Jan 2012

Detailed proposals to be developed Jan- Feb 2012

SMT to consider detailed proposals late Feb 2012

UCU and other key stakeholders to be consulted on detailed proposals March- April
2012


Underpinning analysis by HERA team to ensure consistency with current grades and profiles February- April 2012.

Detailed proposals to go to key committees (Senate, HR Policy Committee, Academic
Staffing Committee, Management Board) May-June 2012
 Implementation September 2012
November 2011

5