• Section 1 - Context
• Section 2 - Authority
• Section 3 - Scope
• Section 4 - Procedure
• Schedule
• Eligibility
• Intent to Apply
• Achievement Relative to Opportunity (ARtO) 
• Promotion Application and Evidence
• Senior Academic Report
• External Assessor Reports
• Committees
• Diversity
• Outcomes
• Appeals

Section 1 - Context

(1) This procedure details the conditions and processes to be followed for the promotion to levels C, D and E.

Section 2 - Authority

(2) Authority for this document is established by the Academic Promotion Policy.

Section 3 - Scope

(3) This procedure applies to all academic staff employed by RMIT University and RMIT Vietnam currently appointed at level B, C or D who meet the prescribed eligibility requirements for promotion.

(4) Vocational Education teachers and Professional staff cannot be promoted to an academic position through this process.

(5) Academic staff at level A eligible for promotion to level B should refer to the Academic Promotion Procedure - Level B.

Section 4 - Procedure

Schedule

(6) The Academic Promotion round for academic levels C, D and E will be run annually and structured to enable the announcement of promotions effective as of 1 January in the following year.

(7) Where there are legitimate circumstances for promotion to occur outside of the scheduled promotion round, an out-of-round promotion application will be permitted in accordance with the Academic Promotion Procedure - Out of Round.

Eligibility

(8) Staff are eligible to submit an application for promotion once every 24 months, where they:

1. are a continuing or fixed term academic staff member
2. have completed 12 months’ continuous service prior to 1 January in the year of the application
3. meet the University-wide formal qualification requirements (or equivalent accreditation and standing) specified for the level to which they are applying for promotion
4. are applying for promotion to the level immediately above their substantive level unless the Vice-Chancellor determines, following a request from the applicant, and supported by the Dean or ADVC, that there are exceptional circumstances and that it is in the best interests of RMIT for promotion to a higher level to be considered
5. have achieved a manager rating of ‘achieves expectations’ for their current level of appointment for the 12 months prior to the year of application, measured against the benchmarks outlined in the Educator and Researcher Framework or its subsequent replacement
6. have a current goals and development plan and a workload agreement, and have participated constructively and in good faith in the University’s goals and development planning process during the 12 months prior to the submission of the application
7. have evidence of satisfactory professional development.

(9) Academics on parental and carer leave (paid and unpaid), long service leave, other long-term leave arrangements or career breaks are eligible to apply for promotion.

(10) Except with the approval of the relevant Deputy Vice-Chancellor (DVC) or equivalent (or nominee), academic staff are excluded from applying for promotion in the 12 months immediately following the submission of an unsuccessful application unless there are exceptional circumstances.

(11) Promotion determinations are made to the level immediately above the applicant’s substantive classification, unless the Vice-Chancellor determines, following a request from the Dean and supported by the DVC, that there are exceptional circumstances and that it is in the best interests of RMIT for promotion to a higher level to be considered.

Intent to Apply

(12) To submit an application for promotion, applicants are required to indicate via the annual performance review process in Workday, that they are planning to apply. An applicant can self-nominate or be nominated by their supervisor (with the agreement of the potential applicant). Training will be provided to supervisors regarding how to identify when individuals are ready for promotion; and barriers to promotion for non-traditional academics.

(13) Applicants must discuss their intention and readiness to apply for promotion and seek in-principle support from the Dean or Associate Deputy Vice Chancellor (ADVC; Learning and Teaching; Research and Innovation; or Engagement – whichever is most appropriate, depending on their primary Domain) four weeks prior to submitting their application. Deans and ADVCs will be provided with training to ensure they are cognizant of the Academic Promotion Framework, administrative processes, support for applicants and equity, diversity and inclusion, including the Indigenous Employment Strategy.

(14) Schools and Colleges are not at liberty to require applicants to undertake additional administrative processes. All such requirements are to be channeled via the central Academic Promotions Team, for potential inclusion in University-wide policy and/or operational documents.

Achievement Relative to Opportunity (ARtO) 

(15) Applicants may activate ARtO to address the impact of personal or work circumstances to work roles on the scope of their application, which allows them to:

1. make a case for promotion based on a reduced number of Education or Research domain criteria and/or
2. justify the use of modified Engagement, Education and Research benchmarks and/or
3. be applied as a general consideration.

(16) ARtO can be used to exclude external Engagement criteria (but not internal engagement criteria).

Promotion Application and Evidence

(17) Applicants must submit their promotion application by the due date.

(18) In the application, applicants for promotion must demonstrate:

1. evidence of achievement and sustained high performance at their current level
2. evidence of satisfactory performance at the level to which promotion is sought, and
3. collegiality, organisational citizenship and alignment to the mission, values and strategic goals of RMIT.

(19) Applicants must base their application on evidence of significant achievements since their last promotion at RMIT; or since appointment to their substantive level at RMIT or previous university (whichever is more recent).

(20) Applicants must respond to the criteria outlined in the Educator and Researcher Framework or its subsequent replacement and address the benchmark performance standards therein.

Senior Academic Report

(21) The Dean, ADVC (or equivalent) must provide a written report as part of the applicant’s promotion submission, commenting on achievement against the criteria and benchmark performance standards, and any other relevant matter. This report may be developed in consultation with other senior academic members from the applicant’s School or discipline.

(22) If the Dean, ADVC or equivalent indicates that they do not support the application, the applicant has a right of reply and may submit a one-page rejoinder within five (5) working days of receiving the written report.

External Assessor Reports

(23) For applicants to levels D and E, up to four external assessors will be invited to provide an ‘in confidence’ assessment of the application.

(24) External assessors should provide an independent assessment of the application.

(25) External assessors may be an external Associate Professor/Professor from another institution and/or an expert external to the University.

(26) For applicants to Level E, at least one external assessor must be a full Professor (not an Associate Professor) and at least one of the reports sought must be from an international external assessor.

(27) Applicants may submit a list of up to five (5) external assessors who they deem unsuitable for the task, indicating the reason for exclusion. This may be on the basis of conflict of interest, interpersonal conflict or other reasonable reason.

Committees

(28) All applications for promotion to Level C, D and E will be considered and assessed by the following Academic Promotion Committees formed under the authority of the Deputy Vice-Chancellor Education:

1. College-level Academic Promotion Committees to consider applications for promotion to Level C and D (including at least two members with broad knowledge of applicants’ teaching and/or research discipline).
2. A Central Academic Promotion Committee to consider applications for promotion to level E.
3. A Moderator Committee of up to six moderators from diverse disciplines and academic levels, including between three (3) and six (6) representatives with lived experience or expertise relating to Australian Indigenous culture, LGBTIQA+ status, disability, neurodivergence, parent/carer status and/or Culturally and Linguistically Diverse (CALD).
   1. The role of the Moderator Committee is to review a sample of applications from each Academic Promotion Committee (College and/or Central) to ensure consistency, fairness, inclusion and equity in assessment; and to be available to sit as a member of a College and/or Central committee if requested by an applicant from an underrepresented background and/or identity (as identified in clause 6 of the Academic Promotion Policy).
   2. Moderators must not sit on an Academic Promotion Committee in the current promotion round, although may be called on to sit on an Out of Round Promotion Committee.
   3. The moderator(s) must attend at least one committee meeting; must attend any meetings at the request of an applicant from an underrepresented background and/or identity; and may attend additional committee meetings at their discretion or nominate a delegate to do so to ensure committee compliance with policy, procedure and the principles of inclusion, equity and fairness.
   4. Moderator Committee members who attend College or Central Committee meetings shall have voting rights equal to those of other voting members.
4. University Academic Promotion Committee (UAPC) to review the Academic Promotion Committee recommended outcomes and make promotion recommendations to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor Education.
5. University Academic Promotion Appeals Committee (UAPAC) to consider appeals on the grounds of eligibility (Level B) and procedure (Levels C to E).

Diversity

(29) Applicants from underrepresented backgrounds and/or identities (as defined in clause 6 of the Academic Promotion Policy) have the option to request the presence and participation of a member of the Moderator Committee at the meeting that reviews their application, for the purpose of assessing the application and providing a perspective relating to the applicant’s background (e.g. an Indigenous or gender diverse perspective).

Outcomes

(30) The Deputy Vice-Chancellor Education has final determination on whether to adopt each recommendation put forward by the University Academic Promotion Committee.

(31) The Deputy Vice-Chancellor Education (or nominee) is to notify all applicants of the outcome of their application.

(32) The College DVC or equivalent (or nominee) and Dean or equivalent is to be notified of outcomes in their area.

(33) Within four weeks of notification (or a later date agreed to by the applicant), unsuccessful applicants are to meet with and be provided with detailed and constructive verbal feedback on their application from the Chair of their Academic Promotion Committee (or nominee) via a meeting of at least 60 minutes’ duration. Where possible, the Dean, ADVC or equivalent (or nominee) should attend the meeting to offer support to the applicant. In addition, the applicant may also invite a support person of their choice to the meeting. Unsuccessful applicants are to be provided with written feedback summarising the Academic Promotion Committee's assessment, with a copy provided to the Dean or ADVC (whichever provided the Dean/ADVC report).

(34) Dean or equivalent (or nominee) shall meet with successful and unsuccessful applicants to discuss the implications of the promotion outcome in regard to workload planning and career development. If appropriate, support relating to the outcome of their application should be provided. 

Appeals

(35) Applicants can lodge an appeal against a promotion outcome on the grounds specified in the Academic Promotion Procedure - Appeals.