Skip to main content
Charles Sturt University
Charles Sturt University

Academic Promotions

Latest News

Applicants should ensure they are referencing the 2018 Policy, Procedure and Guidelines and updated CSU Academic. Documents available here.

Applicants should now be considering potential referees for recommendation to their supervisor.  It is expected that your recommended referees meet the eligibility criteria outlined in the Referee Section (Part B) of the Procedure.   Recommendations should be provided to your supervisor on the Applicant Referee Recommendation Form.

Each applicant will be provided with an academic promotion research report.  This report summarises the recorded research activity of each applicant for the relevant reporting period being considered for the current promotion round and includes a summary of grant applications, active grants, HDR supervision, HERDC income and research outputs.

Grant applications / Active grants / HDR supervision

In 2018, the "Reporting Period" is Jan 2013 through to 31 May 2018.

Grants and applications include consultancies, contract research, tenders, grants or scholarships. Any grant or application with an application date, start date, end date, transfer date, combined date or withdrawal date within the reporting period will be included.

Formal HDR supervisory activity includes only HDR students. Undergraduates, honours or coursework masters are excluded.   HDR students will be included if any part of the supervisory period fell within the reporting period.

HERDC income / research outputs

In 2018, the "Reporting Period" is 2013 through 2017 inclusive.

2018 research outputs are not included in this report and should be specifically detailed in part 6 of the promotion application form.

HERDC income details all research income received that was eligible for inclusion in the Higher Education Research Data Collection (HERDC).   Data is sourced from information provided by CSU to HERDC for that year. Income is split evenly between all named investigators listed as participating in the project regardless of relative contribution. The "primary investigator" role is listed to differentiate where the applicant was the lead investigator or a co-investigator.

It is the responsibility of each applicant to ensure all their relevant research outputs have been reported to the Research Office.

If you want to know more visit …. Research office

Historical Data

Academic promotion performance overview 2013 - 2016

Academic Staff Promotion

Academic staff promotion recognises the achievements and professional development of academic staff and their demonstrated capacity to contribute to CSU's mission through performance at a higher level than their current appointment.

EEO

Merit

Applications for academic promotion must be considered on the basis of merit, unbiased by personal opinion or prejudice.   Recognising that academic staff today may have a range of responsibilities and/or circumstances outside of work that can impact on their academic achievements merit needs to be considered on the basis of achievement relative to opportunity.

Caring responsibilities, disability, ill-health and parental leave for example may impact academic achievement and lead to a non-linear academic career.

Long breaks in careers either due to caring responsibilities, illness or other reasons have effects that are multifaceted and of longer duration than the actual leave time.

These breaks typically reduce opportunities for collaboration, student supervision and delay publication and grant success beyond the return to work date.

Ongoing caring responsibilities of children or other dependents can impact future academic achievement for example reducing research output or restricting opportunity for conference presentations.

Examples of merit on the basis of achievement relative to opportunity.

Example 1 Part Time Work

A staff member who has had several part-time appointments in the promotion period under consideration could calculate their total number years pro rata in their promotion application and demonstrate how the research output is comparable to researchers who have had the same effective years of service.

Example 2 Primary Caring Responsibilities

A staff member with primary caring responsibilities for their child has a low number of international conference papers but has a high citation rate for their papers in prestigious journals.

Example 3 Career Breaks

A parent has had three career breaks for parental leave and on all three occasions returned part-time with a full teaching load. Opportunity for research was delayed for 12 months until increasing their work arrangements to full-time. The panel should take into account not only the loss of time, but also momentum loss when considering the track record of the candidate.

Example 4 – Significant Illness

A staff member experienced a significant illness for two of the seven years they spent at senior lecturer level.  In their application for promotion to associate professor level, the academic promotions committee should take a ‘whole of career' approach, and acknowledge that the candidate has demonstrated performance of a requisite quality although output during the two years of ill-health had been reduced.