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 to implementing the changes agreed upon by 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 is 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.
• An understanding of the impacts on and needs of the Faculties and the Business School when opening promotions for the new Level 7 role is needed, as this could affect the 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 professional services equivalent grades, reflecting the Hay methodology.
• The September agenda would include a discussion of the configuration of recruitment panels and the university's Welcome Service, with the Senior Appointments Manager invited to contribute.
• The individual Vice Deans of Education are to consult with Faculties and Central Services that have Teaching Fellows to understand local recruitment plans for the Level 7 role and to report back to the working group.

Phase III review:

It was acknowledged that capturing the relevant roles within scope would be important.  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 university's community were discussed, including whether the current approach was sufficient and how it 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 the 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 their use over one year.

The Working Group also discussed the formal panel composition for appointments in the Teaching job family, with a consensus that there should be at least one, 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 determine whether it is accessible to neurodivergent individuals.

Responsibilities held by teaching staff, in addition to their everyday roles, were discussed to determine what these are across the Faculties and 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 on the hope of streamlining the forms, which are currently constrained 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 it would be set as late as practicable for the first round.

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

An update was given on the Communications plan for the rollout 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 the use of the 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 underway and will be closely monitored. 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, it would inform the implementation of the Research job family annual promotions process.

The potential need for an updated name for the Working Group was discussed to better align with its current scope.

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

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