Senior Academic Promotions - Guidance on Applications

Introduction

Applications for promotion to Associate Professor, to Professor or between professorial levels are determined by the Senior Academic Promotions Committee (SAPC). SAPC bases its decision on the evidence presented to it in:

The application form submitted by the applicant
The CV submitted by the applicants
The Faculty’s critical appraisal.

SAPC does not take up external references as standard, but it can decide to seek a reference in borderline or complex cases, or where it does not feel able to make a decision on the evidence available to it. If it decides to seek a reference, it will ask the relevant Head of School to nominate the referee (i.e. the applicant will not nominate the referee).

SAPC bases its decision on the evidence available to it, and not on any other factor, or knowledge of the applicants and their achievements or actions.

SAPC includes an academic member of staff from each Faculty, who can explain relevant context, and three external members, who can give a sectoral perspective and ensure that decisions are consistent with standards applied across the sector.

The criteria differ depending on the applicant’s career pathway. SAPC’s focus on the evidence in decision-making means that it is very important that applicants decide their career pathway and the criteria for which they will provide evidence of their activities and impact with considerable care.

Choosing a pathway

By the time academic staff are considering an application for promotion to Associate Professor, most will know which academic career pathway they are pursuing. This should be the subject of regular conversations with their line manager, in their annual PDR discussion, and in check ins to discuss objectives, performance and wellbeing in between. From 2026, all academic staff will specify their intended career pathway as part of the PDR process, to inform discussions about their activities and development. Discussion of their career pathway will also be relevant to the development of individual research plans, or to knowledge exchange, professional practice or HE practice plans, where those are in use, as well as plans, and to more general career planning and to workload planning - our aim is to develop our planning ecosystem to ensure these processes all align to support career development.

It may also be useful to discuss the choice of pathway and what that means for professional activities and personal development with a mentor or with peers and colleagues, who can offer their own perspective and experience.

The choice of pathway will depend on the individual’s prior achievements and future plans, and be informed by their capabilities and interests. There are equal opportunities for advancement on each pathway, so decisions should not take account of any perceived difference in standing or ease of achievement in the different pathways.

The flexible approach to criteria in the academic career pathways framework is designed to support those with strengths across a broad spectrum of academic activities, and to allow for changes of direction over the course of an academic career. It is possible to change to a different academic career pathway as your career evolves, or you change focus over time. However, a change to a different career pathway should not be undertaken lightly, as it may slow your progression as you develop a new body of evidence of sustained achievement. It is recommended that you discuss any plans to change pathway with your line manager, mentor if you have one, and the critical friend who will support you as you consider an application for promotion.

Deciding when to apply

We understand that no one will already be performing across the range of activities at the level they are applying for. SAPC is looking for evidence appropriate to your experience, and demonstrating capability commensurate with the level you are applying for.

SAPC will look primarily at an applicant’s achievements since their most recent promotion and they will expect to see a record of sustained achievement against the criteria (see more on this below), so it would be exceptional that a successful application will be made within 2-3 years at a particular grade.

If you are not sure whether you are ready to apply, it is recommended that you:

Look at the examples of evidence provided for each criterion at each level - you can find these on the pages for promotion to associate professor and to professor - and consider whether you can identify examples from your own achievements that would enable you to address these criteria. If there are gaps, consider how you can meet them, and how long that might take.
Discuss it with your line manager, or your mentor if you have one, or with a trusted peer or senior colleague.
Ask to be assigned a ‘critical friend’ - a senior and experienced member of academic staff who can help you to decide if you are yet working at the level required.

It is not good use of your time, or of the Panel members’, to apply if you cannot provide evidence of the type required against the compulsory criterion and three of the additional criteria. However, we know that some people, especially women, tend to wait until they have no doubt that they meet or exceed every criterion, and this can constrain their careers, so please do think positively, and seek advice if you are unsure.

NB If you seek support from others in deciding if you are ready to apply, they can only give you their own opinion, and this is no guarantee of success or otherwise.

Preparing a compelling application

There are two ways to provide evidence to the Faculty panel and to SAPC - in your CV and in your application form. The CV can be a maximum of 10 pages long, in a minimum of 11pt font with normal margins and no web links, and the application form also has word limits, so you need to decide which examples are most compelling in support of your application and how to present them coherently.

The CV

This is the best place to present facts, such as the roles you have held and your main duties, qualifications, awards, the courses you have taught, lists of outputs, conference presentations, and funding won. We no longer require a narrative CV, but it does provide you with some scope to give data to show the impact or significance of your activities.

When describing your evidence on your CV and application form, remember to:

follow rubrics (word counts, omitting web links etc)
address the criteria directly - don’t waste word count on achievements that aren’t relevant to that criterion
be honest - don’t exaggerate, but don’t be shy to explain why your contribution matters
be specific - about funding levels, how much of that funding comes to Brookes, about your role in and contribution to any joint projects or outputs, and about your evidence, including measures where appropriate.

A template CV is provided to help you to ensure that you include:

an introductory paragraph, summarising the case for promotion
current appointment, followed by previous appointments
education and training
professional qualifications and memberships of professional bodies
key teaching responsibilities in current and recent roles
a list of publications (maximum of 15) that are most relevant to your pathway and criteria, with a brief explanation of their impact and significance
presentations, keynotes and conferences
your record of funding
any key achievements not already included in the above.

If you are reapplying after a previous application, please ensure that your CV highlights developments since the original application.

You should use the template to help you to include all relevant material in a coherent way, but may add sections to it as you need to.

The application form

This is where you explain the difference you have made to your field, your students and colleagues, and the University, and how all of your achievements together demonstrate sustained achievement and the capability to continue to flourish at the level you are seeking. Examples of the types of evidence to cite on the application form are available, but you should note that these are examples only - there is no expectation that any applicant would be able to provide evidence against each of the examples provided. They are intended to demonstrate the kinds of evidence that will be relevant in an application. They are not exhaustive - there will be many other activities and measures of impact that are relevant, and you should think broadly about the evidence you wish to cite in support of your application, and how you can demonstrate your activities, outputs and, importantly, the impact you have had.

Example evidence for Professor applications

Examples evidence for Associate Professor applications

The application form also gives you the opportunity to highlight any exceptional circumstances that have affected your productivity e.g. family leave, an extended period of absence through ill health, disability, or exceptionally intensive caring responsibilities. There may be other factors that are similarly exceptional that have had a significant impact on your professional life. If this may apply to you, please read the more detailed guidance.

The Education, Academic Citizenship and Leadership criterion

From 2026, all applicants are asked to provide evidence to show their contribution to education, academic citizenship and leadership in the University. All of our senior staff are expected to perform consistently across these three areas, so it is important to address all of them in your response to this criterion. There are examples of evidence you might provide in the documents linked above and more detail about each below.

Education

All senior staff should contribute to a high standard to our core mission of education. This does not mean that those on other pathways are expected to engage in curriculum enhancement, and innovation, leadership and development of practice in pedagogy in the same way as those on the Education and HE Practice pathway, for whom this is a specialism. However, all of our academic staff should be able to demonstrate that they engage in high quality teaching across a range of levels, using up to date teaching methods and materials. They should provide evidence in this criterion of the successful outcomes of their teaching, and of their internal and external recognition, and that they contribute to an inclusive student experience.

Academic Citizenship

This encompasses a wealth of activities that combine to ensure that Oxford Brookes’ offers a high quality education, an inclusive experience for our students, and a culture of collegiality and collaboration. It is the ‘glue’ that holds the institution together, and demonstrates that a staff member is committed not just to their own career but to their field and to our collective success as a University.

All those who enter our senior grades must play their part in this ecosystem, and be seen to do so competently and in a way that supports our values.

Leadership

Those applying for senior academic grades within the University are expected to demonstrate their leadership capability. If successful, they will become role models and leaders, with the responsibility that entails.

It is recognised that there are insufficient formal leadership roles available for everyone to hold one, particularly at earlier stages of their career. This does not prevent individual staff members from building and demonstrating their leadership skills, through formal or informal roles that have a leadership element. This might include:

One-off roles on committees or projects, perhaps as a result of discussions with a line manager, mentor or senior sponsor.
Roles in internal networks, such as Staff Networks, Research Networks, or the recognised trade unions.
Elected or appointed positions, such as those on Academic Board, or the Board of Governors.
Roles in professional bodies, either in your academic field, or the wider sector, or in partner organisations
Acting as mentor to others, for a specific application or project, or on an ongoing basis through the various mentoring programmes the University operates.

Those applying for the role of professor will be expected to demonstrate more extensive leadership experience, and this is likely to have included formal roles as committee chairs, or subject leader, or leader of a complex module, or within an internal or external network. They will also be expected to be able to demonstrate that they have been a role model of our Guiding Principles and to have proactively sought to mentor and develop colleagues.

Important concepts to think about

Impact

The panel will want to know not only what you have done but what impact that has had on your students and colleagues, on the University and your field. You should explain the significance of your achievements and what difference they have made - the Panel will want to see that you have improved the student experience, developed colleagues, or helped the University achieve its mission.

Evidence

If at all possible, provide evidence that demonstrates your outputs and the impact they have had. This could be quantitative measures, such improvements in recruitment or retention, or qualitative evidence, such as ‘best paper’ prizes, or a demonstrable change of practice in the field. If it is difficult to prove causality, explain briefly why you think your achievements led to that improvement; the aim is to give the panel confidence both that you assess the impact of your work and that you have made a positive difference internally or externally.

Feedback

Feedback, such as comments from students, colleagues or external referees, can help to give a rounded picture of your achievements, but comments from individuals are likely to carry less weight than quantitative measures that demonstrate the impact you have had on a cohort of students, or a group of your peers. Given the word limits in your application, any quotes should be short and directly relevant.

Internal awards and funding

These will help to give a rounded picture of your activities and achievements, but will carry less weight than external awards or funding. For example, an OBSU Teaching Award should be included, but will carry less weight than the award of SFHEA by Advance HE, which reflects the assessment of peers across the sector on a body of evidence. Similarly, an external grant will influence SAPC more than an internal award of project funding, because the competition is greater, and the benefit to Brookes is greater.

Sustainability

The criteria refer repeatedly to sustained achievement e.g. a body of outputs, a sustained record of funding. This is because it is important for the panel to see that applicants are able to maintain their level of contribution over time,

Funding levels

Those who apply for promotion on the Education and Research pathway are required to address the criterion ‘Sustainable Research Funding’. The Education, Knowledge Exchange and Professional Practice pathway also contains a criterion focussed on funding. It is not possible to specify the level of funding expected, or to provide a minimum threshold, as this will differ depending on disciplinary norms and the availability of funding in the applicant’s area of work, their career stage and a number of other factors.

As they consider their readiness to address this criterion and as context for their application, staff on these pathways may wish to consider sector norms for bid success and for research funding per FTE in different fields. We have collated data on sector mean and median income per year per FTE for many relevant REF Units of Assessment for ease of reference. You can also find relevant data from HESA, relating to cost centres, or from UKRI - see, for examples tables 1a, 1b and 4 for applications and awards by funding council. This data does not constitute a threshold or a minimum expectation; it is intended to improve understanding of the external context and norms. It is understood that many factors will impact on the ability of individual staff members to submit successful funding applications, and applications will be considered in the round.

It is expected that funding can be demonstrated to be sustained i.e. the applicant has developed their ability to win funding as they have become more senior and experienced. They will be able to demonstrate development in their ability to make high-quality bids that receive positive feedback, and increasing size of bids and success rates. Funding that brings a positive benefit to the University through overheads will carry more weight than funding that supports only project costs. The Panel will take account of norms within the subject area.

Relevance

those who have not been at Brookes for that long may wish to present examples from their work in other HEIs or even other sectors. These are relevant insofar as they demonstrate capability and can show impact, but the majority of evidence cited should relate to work delivered within Brookes or while working at Brookes, and the impact of your achievements on the University or your field while working here.

Similarly, some examples may be historic. It is understood that no one has time to contribute across the spectrum of academic activities within a short period of time and some examples are likely to be from longer ago than others. However, the Panel will primarily be interested in examples from the relatively recent past, as these demonstrate your current capability, so focus on examples from the last five years, and certainly those since your most recent promotion.

‘Forthcoming’ activities and publications, and future plans

The Panel will want to know enough about your trajectory of development and future plans for research, knowledge exchange, professional practice or pedagogic activities to have confidence that you will maintain your level of contribution if promoted, but they will not rely on that in assessing your capability to perform at the level expected for the grade you are applying for. Therefore, your focus in making your case for promotion should be on those achievements that have been delivered - outputs in print, projects delivered, improvements in practice that can be seen and measured.

Drawing on sources of support

In addition to this guidance, there are a number of sources of support available to you in determining your career pathway, when to apply for promotion, which criteria to choose and what evidence to present.

Attend the briefings provided by the University - either or both of the briefing covering the academic careers framework as a whole and the briefings focussed on each of the particular pathways. These will be advertised in Staff Update and all-staff emails.
Talk to your line manager - in your PDR meeting, in catch ups in between, or by asking them to meet you for a subject specific meeting.
If you have a mentor, seek their advice. They will already be familiar with your aspirations, strengths and challenges, and will help you think it through.
Talk to peers or senior staff you trust, and who have relevant experience.

Finally, if you are seriously considering applying this year, ask to be assigned a critical friends. These are senior staff who have been briefed on the process and the criteria, who will help you to determine whether you are ready to apply and, if you are, which criteria to address and what evidence to present. They can’t tell you if you will be successful, and they won’t draft or re-draft for you, but they will give you the benefit of their understanding of the University and the process.