Scoring Range
The maximum score for an evaluative criterion is reserved for demonstrable exceptional achievement against the norms of the applicant’s discipline, for example a high level of international recognition for their stage in their career. It would be highly unusual for an applicant to operate at the maximum score across both evaluative criteria; therefore, any committee awarding such high scores is expected to include a justification in the minutes of their meeting.
Scoring Teaching and Scholarship Contribution
Each committee will assess the quantity, quality and degree of innovation and leadership (e.g. course design at a macro level) in teaching. If an academic teaching & scholarship post holder is undertaking a standard amount of teaching in a satisfactory way, a mid-range score would be appropriate. Many teaching staff teach more than their stint from time to time and regularly contribute to updating courses and modules; such contributions are regarded to be part of their usual academic role.
If a Head of Institution (or other senior academic) providing the Institutional Statement believes the applicant’s contribution is at a significantly higher or lower level than the standard expected of academic teaching & scholarship staff on the grade currently held, and merits a score substantially higher or lower than the standard expected, detailed evidence must be provided.
All academic teaching & scholarship staff are expected to be able to evidence criteria 1 and 2 as relevant to each stage of progression as specified in Schemes A and B respectively, with scoring reflecting the quality and quantity of contribution. The award of a very high score therefore indicates that the applicant is making an exceptional contribution in several aspects of teaching. The nature of that exceptional contribution should be addressed in the SC meeting minutes. A low score indicates that there are significant concerns about the quantity or quality of an applicant’s teaching and the Institutional Statement should clearly set out these concerns.
Furthermore, that teaching is expected to benefit considerably from relevant scholarship in the discipline or applied to its delivery (criterion 3) and/or the applicant will be expected to evidence significant contributions to developmental or strategic initiatives (criterion 4). Thus, even excellent teaching and a major contribution to curriculum redesign without evidence of such contributions would not warrant scores in the highest banding.
Scoring Service to the University and the Academic Community
For a standard general contribution, a mid-range score would be appropriate. To justify a higher score there needs to be evidence of sustained contribution to the Institution, University or externally. If a Head of Institution (or other senior academic) providing the Institutional Statement believes the applicant’s contribution is at a significantly higher or lower level than the standard expected and merits a score substantially higher or lower than the standard expected, detailed evidence needs to be provided. The award of a very high score indicates that the applicant is making an exceptional contribution and this should be addressed in the respective committees’ minutes.
No carry forward
Any score received, whether against a particular criterion or as a total score, only applies to the ACP T&S round for that particular year. The score will assist the FC and SC for that year’s exercise in creating a rank-ordered list, rather than being an absolute number. Scores will not be carried forward from one ACP T&S round to another and the Committees will not be made aware of scores from any previous applications.
Each year is a new exercise and it is the responsibility of each Committee to make its own decision on the basis of an evaluation of the evidence provided.