The Faculty and Institutional panels are determined to treat all applicants fairly and equitably. To this end the panel will take into account personal circumstances that have had an impact on an individual’s ability to provide evidence of the volume of activity that the individual has been able to undertake..
The quality or level of performance required will not vary, but volume expectations will be varied appropriate to an individual’s personal circumstances as specified below. Applicants should detail the impact that their personal circumstances have had on specific activities or elements of the pathway criteria
The Faculty panel will consider the following individual circumstances to the extent that they are stated to have had a material impact on the individual’s ability to produce the expected volume of activity relevant to the conferment of the title of Professor or Reader:
a. Part-time working or other flexible working arrangements.
b. Family and domestic matters, including:
- Absence on maternity, paternity, parental or adoption leave and arrangements on return to work following these periods of leave.
- Time spent acting as a carer or other domestic commitments.
If staff require support or guidance relating to the above, we have parent/carer advocates available who can be contacted at parentcareradvocate@ljmu.ac.uk
In addition, where the panel is considering subjects that require laboratory-based activity they will be mindful of health and safety restrictions imposed on pregnant and nursing women which may have prevented them from undertaking some types of activity during the period relevant to the conferment of the title of Professor or Reader.
c. Disability, ill-health and injury, including:
- Any disability to which the Equality Act 2010 applies, including both permanent disabilities and any temporary disability with a duration of 12 months or more.
- Absence from work on the advice of a registered medical practitioner.
- Menopause and perimenopause are other examples that may be used under personal circumstances as a cause of impact. Whilst this is not specifically protected under the Equality Act, it is recognised that this can have a significant impact on female members of staff.
d. Prolonged absences (absences for more than six months consecutively in the period relevant to the conferment of the title of Professor or Reader) which were agreed by the individual with the institution, but which do not fall into one of the categories above. These include:
i. Secondment to non-academic positions outside the higher education sector.
ii. Career breaks for purposes unconnected with research, teaching or other academic duties.
d. Any other personal circumstances considered to have had a significant impact on an individual’s ability to produce evidence related to their chosen pathway criteria (e.g. the expected volume of research outputs) in the period relevant to the conferment of the title of Professor or Reader (i.e. COVID-19).
Q. Does the application go back to the Faculty &/or Professional/Service Areas?
A. All applications are provided by HR to the Faculty PVC &/or Executive Lead for the Professional Services areas. The Faculty is asked for the local view of the applicant and then at the Shortlisting Panel a School representative (normally the School Director) will present the case and lead discussion. The Faculty make a recommendation to the University panel regarding the academic standing of the applicant within their School/Faculty. For Professional Service applications, normally a single Professional Services Panel is convened by the PVC RKE with appropriate staff involvement and any case is normally presented by the Head of the relevant Professional Service Area.
Q. Are Faculties asked to prioritise applications?
A. Faculty PVC’s &/or Executive Leads for Professional/ Service areas are asked to convene a meeting of the Directors of Schools and other relevant staff including representation from the University Panel (to provide oversight and consistency) to consider all applications from their Faculty. Faculty meetings should take adequate steps to reflect key EDI issues on their panel. Faculties are asked to prepare briefing notes on individual applications that review and comment on the strengths and weaknesses of each application. Personal circumstances information (produced by the candidate) are noted and taken into consideration. The relative merit of the application in relation to the published conferment criteria should be commented upon.
Q. Is there any quota on the number of awards available?
A. No, there is no quota, applications are judged on their individual merit.
Q. How many of the four pathways can you apply against?
A. The applicant can only apply through one pathway and it is a matter for the applicant to decide. The application procedure asks that applicants state clearly which of the pathway they are applying under. Try to ensure that you apply against the criteria that demonstrates the full impact of your work and experience. It is important that you make reference in your application as to how your work contributes to the University Strategy 2030.
Q. What are the benchmarks for deciding whether an applicant meets the criteria?
A. There are no benchmarks for the criteria as a whole. The Panel has to consider a very broad range of subject areas and types of submissions as well as a wide array of evidence against each critieria. It would be impossible to set specific benchmarks that would cover the very wide range of applications that might be successful. The primary consideration is the overall quality of the application and there is no algorithm for deciding whether an applicant has reached the appropriate level. Decisions are made based on a judgement of all of the evidence provided and the process is not mechanistic.
Q. What kinds of Independent External Assessors are required?
A. Three appropriate Independent External Assessors who have not supervised, collaborated or published/produced outputs with the applicant, but should be able to comment on the applicant's standing in their subject area. They should be selected for their understanding of the subject field rather than for their personal knowledge of the applicant. The assessors should be able to comment on the content and context of the submission and should either be an academic or of equivalent standing in a relevant field. Independent external assessors' details should be listed with full contact details (including relationship to the external assessor, a postal address, email and, where available, a phone number) together with a brief resume for each[GK1] .
For shortlisted candidates the Faculties and or Professional/Service area will be required to provide the names of three additional appropriate independent external assessors. These are in addition to those put forward by the applicant. The Secretary to the Conferment Panel will send reference requests to all referees. For Professorial applications, Faculties should review the referees provided by the applicant and ensure that additional referees allow for a minimum of 3/6 (overall) are working at an international institution or in an international capacity.
Q. Is it appropriate to nominate international, industrial or professional Independent External Assessors?
A. There is no reason why international, industrial or professional assessors cannot be nominated. It is a requirement at Professorial level that at least two of the three assessors submitted by the candidate have international affiliation. Consideration should be given to the appropriateness of the Assessor on the basis of the case for support that is being made.
Assessors must be able to understand the academic context within the UK as well as comment on the applicant's contribution to and standing in their field. Assessors must be external to LJMU. An international external assessor, as with any assessor, must be able to comment in an informed manner on the applicant's standing against the criteria used by LJMU.
Q. Is it necessary for applicants to contact Independent External Assessors before nominating them?
A. No, applicants should not do this, the Secretary to the Panel will approach them formally on behalf of the Panel.
Q. Where do professional bodies fit in?
A. Involvement in professional bodies might be a way to demonstrate external recognition in a particular field. An example could be if an applicant was working for their professional body on developing a new curriculum for their field, the applicant could then show that they had contributed to or led developments in their field. In many areas specific Professional Accreditation would also reflect recognition and evidence of esteem.
Q. What kind of evidence is required regarding the quality of my work, and my standing in my field?
A. Evidence of reputation and standing outside the applicant's immediate locality (e.g. LJMU) is required. Applicants should use their statement of case for support to describe their contribution to their field and the impact they have had. This will normally mean demonstrating the impact that an individual has had on influencing and leading developments outside LJMU. There are multiple ways in which individuals can evidence the quality of their work and standing and this is where looking at past applications and working closely with a mentor, critical friend and/or line manager can be very helpful.
Q. How can standing in teaching and learning be demonstrated?
A. Applicants should demonstrate that they are having an impact beyond their immediate local environment, in practice this will normally mean something that could be benchmarked in some way by an external reviewer. For example, being a member of a national committee/working group or adviser on policy initiatives on L&T; being invited to provide expert input to a conference as keynote speaker; having developed initiatives that were taken up by others in the sector; having got funding for teaching related research and/or projects; having published in journals on L&T in HE. Other examples include evidence of leading, teaching and learning developments across LJMU; evidence of advances in pedagogy; influencing the national agenda; leading a major national initiative in the field; recognition of achievement by professional bodies.
Applicants would be expected to cite the evidence but not to submit it, e.g. if an applicant cited that they were a member of the National Advisory Panel for the National Teaching Fellowship Awards that could easily be verified. Similarly if an applicant stated that work they had done on L&T had been published in Office for Students Good Practice Case Studies as an example of best practice that is easily verified, published by, for example, the Advance HE or one of its Subject Networks.
Q. How does the Panel judge future promise?
A. The criteria for conferment state that the Panel will look for positive evidence of actual and sustained achievement as well as future promise or “trajectory”. The Panel would expect to see something about an applicant's future plans in their letter of support perhaps backed up by specific details (e.g. in research this might be in Press or submitted publications, outputs or grants). The panel would normally expect to see evidence of sustained achievement over time, and evidence that the achievement was likely to continue into the future. Often this will simply mean that an applicant has a consistent and continuing pattern of achievement, with no obvious or inexplicable reduction in output. If there is some reason why a simple pattern of achievement is absent a short explanation of this should be provided.
Q. How is interdisciplinary activity assessed?
A. Applicants should explain the interdisciplinary nature of their work in the case for support and nominate appropriate independent assessors who could comment on this.
Q. How would the Panel consider publications or evidence in different languages?
A. Publications or any other evidence of output activity produced in languages other than English should be listed in the applicant's CV with their original title and an english translation of the title underneath it. Applicants should nominate appropriate independent assessors who would be able to understand and comment on the standing of the publications.
Q. How is the membership of the Panel determined?
A. The conferment panel is appointed via the Vice Chancellor and includes members of the Executive Leadership Team. The panel also contains representatives of the Professoriate as well as an external panel member. In appointing members consideration is given to subject balance, continuity and social composition and the panels ability to reflect EDI criteria and carefully evaluate all conferment routeways.
Q. What information is given to unsuccessful applicants on the outcome of their application?
A. Feedback from the Faculty panel will be via the School/Professional Services Director (or their nominated individual). Unsuccessful applicants at the University Panel are advised of the outcome of their application by HR as soon as possible after the Panel meeting (this includes both the initial and final University Panel) and this will be shared with the Faculty PVC/Professional Service Head to instigate support processes locally (local action plans). A member of the Panel can give oral feedback to each unsuccessful applicant if requested.
Q. Are staff who are on fixed term contracts eligible to apply for conferment?
A. Staff employed on contracts supported by specific limited funding streams (for example, research assistants funded from grant income) are not eligible to apply for Professorships and Readerships. The reason for this is that no budget is available to support the increased costs associated with the award of the title due to the staffing costs being determined at the commencement of the contract.
Q. How does any application take into consideration someone who is part-time?
A. The evidence provided in the application will take account of the size of the part-time FTE, the length of the part-time working and will, in general terms, be used to reduce the volume of evidence required (but not that of quality).
Q. If you are on a part-time contract and do work related to your application outside of LJMU, can you include this?
A. If the work is relevant to your academic production, impact and esteem then this may be included and if so must be clearly articulated within the submission.
Q. I am a researcher based in a service department. I am considering applying for readership (research route) in a couple of years’ time. In terms of Faculty panel approval process how and where will I be evaluated?
A. You will be evaluated against the same academic criteria as all other applicants in your conferment pathway. Your application will likely be considered by a single Professional Services Panel convened by the PVC RKE. Your Professional Service Director will present your case and lead discussion.
Q. Are applicants able to seek feedback from the Faculty PVC/Executive lead before sending their application in?
A. Yes, applicants are encouraged to seek feedback from their Faculty PVC/ Executive Lead and anyone else locally (Director of School, Line manager etc) that they feel will be able to give them objective feedback on their application.
Q. Will the Panel take into account an individual's career circumstances?
A. Yes. As described in "Circumstances having an impact on volume of output for Professorial or Readership Conferment" in the Criteria and Guidelines for Conferment document, the Panel will consider how an applicant's submission may have been impacted by relevant circumstances if this is brought to their attention by the applicant. This can also include the impact of CoVid-19.
Q. Is there any practical support available during the Conferment application writing process?
A. A programme of events will be scheduled to support the 4 separate pathways and specific sessions will be run for groups of staff (e.g. Women’s Academic Network, Ethnic Minorities staff). Those staff who are being actively mentored will get support and we urge staff to seek support and advice from colleagues locally, especially those who have been successful previously.
Q. If you feel you straddle TWO pathways? How to pick which one?
A. This is probably one of the toughest questions and requires some long, honest self-reflection as well as feedback from mentors, colleagues etc. In essence the simple answer is where you feel you best meet the criteria and can demonstrate high quality and sustained activity. Sometimes the external voice is helpful. Don’t forget that in your letter you have to comment on your activity in contributing to the University’s Strategic Plan, so this will allow you space to demonstrate your broader activities and achievements.
Q. The importance of gathering voices of external stakeholders (relevant to an application) has been mentioned. Can these be informal/formal quotes or are these in addition to the peer reviews?
A. These would be informal quotes, likely best placed in your letter and because they know you and your work personally these people would not necessarily be well-place to provide the independent expert peer-review. If you use quotations of this nature, please make sure the person involved gives their agreement as comments may be verified/audited.
Q. What is the status of a) mentoring Ed D students and supervision of Ed D students regarding completions? Does this count as PhD completions?
A. All Doctoral-level students can be included in the supervision criteria. This includes the most common route of PhD. Supervision of Doctoral programmes like EdD, DBA and other professional Doctorates are still “Doctoral” level, produce new knowledge and insight and require similar skill development and demonstration in supervision.
Q. If I fall short on one criteria (i.e. grant income) and can provide strong evidence in the other 3 criteria, along with good citizenship within LJMU and service to profession externally, what is your advice? Drop everything else and try to secure that grant, or attempt an application for promotion?
A. Again, this a tough element of the process as there is no “one” single way career and CV development happens for all. Academics should engage in a healthy self-critical reflection on their career at regular timepoint to identify areas of strength and relative weakness. Garnering external funding is an important element of career and work development in many ways. In and of itself it reflects some level of esteem for your ideas and work and of course it will likely lead to outputs, conference presentations, possibly PGR completions. It is probably not wise to “drop everything” but it is important to have focus and look to manage specific areas of your activity and CV at different times. Clearly if you have received some focused feedback on a prior submission that states a specific requirement it is sensible to focus on that and demonstrate success at the next application.
Q. How is it ensured that the Conferment process is fair and that no one suffers any disadvantage due to a protected characteristics (e.g. race, sex, disability)
A. This information for applications is recorded on a standard proforma with the conferment process using specific criteria, which is identified in the documentation and is based on an individual’s ability to evidence their success against the criteria. The documentation and process gives individual the opportunity to highlight their personal circumstances and any impact that this has had. The panel recognises and integrates any stated personal circumstances that may have affected an individual’s ability to work and meet the criteria.
As part of our equal opportunity policies we are committed to monitoring applications and appointments through the conferment process. It is our intention to ensure that applications are treated solely on the basis of their merits, abilities and potential, regardless of gender, race, colour, nationality, ethnic or national origin, age, socio-economic background, disability, religious or political beliefs, trade union membership, family circumstances, sexual orientation or other irrelevant distinction.
