Phase II

The Learning & Teaching and Research Terms and Conditions and use of Fixed Term Contracts Working Group reconvened for their first meeting, commencing the Phase III period.

 In this meeting, Working Group members discussed the approach that would be taken to implement the changes that were agreed upon in the Academic Strategy Committee.

The outcome of this included:

• The formation of a Task & Finish Group to develop guidance on how to use the ten professional development days for the Teaching job family.
• An update on the new role profiles for the Teaching and Research job families, now available on the Promotion webpage. Discussed the benefits of generic job specifications for the two job families with the ability to add a role specific paragraph. 
• Support for aligning the new career progression and promotion process for the Teaching and Research job families with the Academic job family, creating consistency and transparency. Initial work is to be undertaken by the newly combined Teaching and Research workstream. 
• Recruitment to the new Level 7 Professor of Teaching in XXX (where XXX is the Department or Discipline) will follow a formal process akin to that of a professorial appointments board.
• Understanding needs to be sought on the impacts on, and needs of the Faculties and the Business School, when opening promotions for the new Level 7 role, as this could impact introduction.

 The Terms of Reference for Phase III were then considered and discussed.

 The Working Group agreed that monthly, 90-minute meetings would be appropriate.

The Working Group began the July meeting by reviewing Actions from the previous meeting:

• Agreed the September meeting would review the output from the Task and Finish group guidance on the 10 CPD Days for staff within the Teaching job family.
• Identified that the new role profiles which had been added to the website and draft Teaching job family job descriptions required further work.
• The essential and desirable requirements to be considered critically in terms of EDI, and what actually can and cannot be evidenced.
• Incorporate equivalent qualifications.
• The addition of the professional services equivalent grades, reflective of the Hay methodology.
• That the September agenda would include a discussion on the configuration of recruitment panels and the College Welcome Service and Senior Appointments Manager invited to contribute to the discussion.
• The individual Vice Deans of Education to consult with Faculties and Central Services who have Teaching Fellows, to understand local plans for recruitment for the Level 7 role, and to report back to the working group.

Phase III review:

It was acknowledged that it would be important to capture the relevant roles within scope.  The roles identified by the group included: Research Software Engineers, Learning Technologists, Instrument Technicians, Experimental Facility Managers and Clinical Trial Specialists.

Communications:

Communications with the College community were discussed and whether the current approach was sufficient, as well as how this could be improved.  Suggestions made included cascading relevant information through departments to ensure comms reached the local level. 

At the September Learning & Teaching and Research Terms and Conditions and Use of Fixed Term Contracts Working Group meeting, the group discussed the finalised terms and approach to implementing 10 Development Days for Teaching Fellows. Discussions also included identifying ways of ensuring Teaching Fellows can use these development days. The next steps involve adding the development days to the contract template, a communications plan and an anonymous survey to review the use of the days in one year.

The Working Group also discussed the formal panel composition for appointments in the Teaching job family, with a consensus on there being at least one, although preferably two, external panel members and a Consul for Levels 6 and 7 promotions. It was decided that flexibility may be needed, i.e. one external panel member and one internal panel member from a different Faculty.

It was raised that the promotions documentation may need to be reviewed to consider whether it is accessible for individuals who are neurodivergent.

Responsibilities held by Teaching staff in addition to their everyday roles were discussed to find out what these are across Faculties to ensure uniformity. 

At the November meeting the Working Group reviewed and discussed the updated Teaching promotion documents, which have been aligned with the Academic documents. The documents reviewed included the Application Form, Reference Request Letters, HoD Citation briefing and formal Promotions Guidance. Some of the discussions centred around the hope to streamline the forms, which is currently restricted by technology, as well as the number and types of referees required across levels. The deadline for the submission of applications was also discussed, and it was agreed that this would be set as late as practically possible for the first round.

Further guidance will be provided via a presentation at a Teaching Fellows Lunch, along with the associated slides and recording, which will focus more on practical guidance and there will be opportunities for questions from Teaching Fellows, which will be captured in a FAQ document.

An update was given on the Communications plan for the roll out of the 10 Development Days for Teaching Fellows.

At the January meeting, the Working Group reflected on the progress made under Phase II of the Learning & Teaching and Research Terms & Conditions and use of Fixed Term contracts project; the Teaching Role Profiles have been updated, new titles were agreed for Levels 6 and 7, and the 10 Development Days for Teaching Fellows had been implemented. The new Teaching annual promotions process is currently underway and will be monitored closely. A review will be undertaken to evaluate and make improvements based on the first year of operation.  It was agreed that, once a review had taken place, this will then inform the Research job family annual promotions process implementation.

The potential need for an updated name for the Working Group was discussed, to align more with the current scope of the Working Group.

The Terms of Reference for Phase III were also reviewed by the Working Group. Those that fall under “Technology Specialists” were considered, as well as those that hold roles which sit between the Research job family and PTO staff. It was considered that there may be department-specific roles which may fall within the remit of this Phase which may need to be sought out.

The Working Group were asked to consider workstream membership for Phase III.