In evaluating applications Committees will expect to see a rising career trajectory, particularly with regard to research for promotion to Professorships (Grade 11 and 12) and Clinical Professorships. The bandings and scores set out in the tables below should be used to summarise the description of achievement in relation to the Assessment Criteria.
Scoring range
The maximum score for an evaluative criterion is reserved for demonstrable exceptional achievement against the norms of the applicant’s discipline, for example a high level of international recognition for their stage in their career. It would be highly unusual for an applicant to operate at the maximum score across all three evaluative criteria; therefore, any committee awarding such high scores is expected to include a justification in the minutes of their meeting.
Scoring Teaching and Researcher Development Contribution
Each committee will assess the quantity, quality and degree of innovation and leadership (e.g. course design at a macro level) in teaching. If a teaching officer is undertaking a standard amount of teaching, for example lectures, exams and demonstrations, in a satisfactory way, a mid-range score would be appropriate. Many teaching officers teach more than their stint from time to time and regularly contribute to updating courses and modules; such contributions are regarded to be part of their usual academic role.
If a Head of Institution (or other senior academic) providing the Institutional Statement believes the applicant’s contribution is at a significantly higher or lower level than the standard expected and merits a score substantially higher or lower than the standard expected, detailed evidence must be provided.
If the quantity or quality of teaching is significantly greater than the standard expected or there has been a contribution to the design of new courses or modules or to a major revamp of existing offerings, then an award of additional points may be considered by the FC.
The award of a very high score indicates that the applicant is making an exceptional contribution in one or more aspects of teaching. The nature of that exceptional contribution should be addressed in the respective FC and SC meeting minutes. A low score indicates that there are significant concerns about the quantity or quality of an applicant’s teaching and the Institutional Statement should clearly set out these concerns.
Scoring Service to the University and the Academic Community
For a standard general contribution, a mid-range score would be appropriate. To justify a higher score there needs to be evidence of sustained contribution to the Institution, University or externally. If a Head of Institution (or other senior academic) providing the Institutional Statement believes the applicant’s contribution is at a significantly higher or lower level than the standard expected and merits a score substantially higher or lower than the standard expected, detailed evidence needs to be provided. The award of a very high score indicates that the applicant is making an exceptional contribution and this should be addressed in the respective committees’ minutes.
No carry forward
Any score received, whether against a particular criterion or as a total score, only applies to the ACP R&T round for that particular year. The score will assist the FC and SC for that year’s exercise in creating a rank-ordered list, rather than being an absolute number. Scores will not be carried forward from one ACP R&T round to another and the Committees will not be made aware of scores from any previous applications.
Each year is a new exercise and it is the responsibility of each Committee to make its own decision on the basis of an evaluation of the evidence provided.