[These guidelines and procedures were promulgated on 24 February 1995.]

Ccst

Informations

• Publié par: Faut
• Nombre de lectures: 13
• Langue: English

Extrait

THE HONG KONG UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY Academic Personnel Policy and Procedure Manual POLICY ON ACADEMIC REVIEW Date: 1 Jul 2003 Section: AP20.0 Supersedes: 28 Feb 1997 Page: 1 of 6 [This version of 1 July 2003, superseding the previous version dated 28 February 1997, has incorporated revisions effective from 1 July 2002 approved by Senate on 10 April 2002. Revisions have also been made to reflect the new Faculty Rank and Salary (AP09.0) approved by the University Council on 20 May 2003 for adoption with effect from 1 July 2003.] BACKGROUND 1. Review of academic performance is an essential ingredient in a comprehensive approach to quality assurance for the University's teaching and research programs. For decisions on substantiation (tenure), the nature of this review is specified in the Policy on Substantiation already adopted. This policy outlines a more general academic review process that may be applied to contract renewal, salary advancement, promotion and other decisions for which academic performance is a relevant consideration. DEFINITION [Section 3 is an addition to the previous version dated 28 February 1997.] 2. In this policy, the term Department shall be understood to include the Divisions of the School of Humanities and Social Science, and Department Heads shall include the Division Heads. 3. A negative recommendation of a review party referred to in the relevant review process of this policy is defined as follows: “A negative recommendation of a review committee arises if a positive motion in support of the application under review fails to carry. A motion will fail to carry if the number of positive votes is not in excess of the negative votes or if there is no positive vote to support the motion. For example, an equal number of ‘yes’ and ‘no’ votes cast for a positive motion in support of an application culminates a negative recommendation, or in the case that there is no ‘yes’ vote, e.g., all votes cast are ‘abstention’ votes, the motion will not carry either and (1) this voting outcome will also be regarded as a negative recommendation. (1) Letting#yesbethenumberof‘yes’votesand#nobethenumberof‘no’votes,thepossibleoveralloutcomes are:  Vote comparison Overall outcome  #yes > #no positive  #yes
#no negative  #yes = zero negative

THE HONG KONG UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY Academic Personnel Policy and Procedure Manual POLICY ON ACADEMIC REVIEW Date: 1 Jul 2003 Section: AP20.0 Supersedes: 28 Feb 1997 Page: 2 of 6 By the same token, if the recommendation of an academic administrator (the Head, the Dean or VicePresident for Academic Affairs) does not indicate a positive support for an application, it will be regarded as a negative recommendation.” REVIEW PROCESS [Sections 4 to 6 replace sections 3 to 8 of the previous version dated 28 February 1997.] 4. Assistant Professor 4.1 The process described in this section applies to reviews of Assistant Professors of which the Dean is the approving authority, e.g. renewing employment contracts or salary bar reviews for Assistant Professors. 4.2 Academic review at the Department level shall involve the academic staff of that Department (and, where deemed valuable, academic staff invited from outside the Department) in accordance with procedures established by each Department with the concurrence of the School Board. This review shall culminate with a Departmental report containing a recommendation and a summary of the pros and cons as these arose in the deliberations on the review. The Department Head shall consider the report of the Department, make a separate and independent recommendation with a statement of reasons, and forward the results of the review to the Dean. 4.3 The Dean shall refer such cases to the School Appointments and Substantiation Committee (hereinafter referred to as the School Committee), appointed in accordance with the Policy on Substantiation, for advice before making the decision. 4.4 After considering the recommendations of the Department and the School Committee, the Dean shall inform the Assistant Professor being reviewed of his decision and if the decision is negative, the Dean shall also inform the faculty member's right of appeal on procedural grounds in accordance with the University’s Appeal Policy and Procedure (AP24.0). 4.5 The Dean’s decision shall be conveyed in a letter to the applicant, which shall be delivered to the applicant by the Department Head in person. The Dean shall also convey to the Department Head the gist of the rationales of the decision reached at the school level. The Department Head shall, in delivering the letter to the applicant, have a discussion with the applicant on both positive and negative aspects of the case.

5.

THE HONG KONG UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY Academic Personnel Policy and Procedure Manual POLICY ON ACADEMIC REVIEW

Date: Supersedes:

1 Jul 2003 28 Feb 1997

Section: Page:

AP20.0 3 of 6

4.6 A flow chart illustrating the above process is inAnnex Iof this paper. Associate Professor 5.1 The process described in this section applies to reviews of Associate Professors of which the VPAA is the approving authority, e.g. promotion from B to A scale salary (2) Associate Professor or salary bar reviews for Associate Professors. 5.2 Academic review at the Department level shall involve the academic staff of that Department (and, where deemed valuable, academic staff invited from outside the Department) in accordance with procedures established by each Department with the concurrence of the School Board. This review shall culminate with a Departmental report containing a recommendation and a summary of the pros and cons as these arose in the deliberations on the review. The Department Head shall consider the report of the Department, make a separate and independent recommendation with a statement of reasons, and forward the results of the review to the Dean. 5.3 The Dean shall refer such cases to the School Committee, appointed in accordance with the Policy on Substantiation, for advice before making the decision. The Dean shall consider the report of the School Committee and make a separate and independent recommendation with a statement of reasons. 5.4 If the recommendations of the Department committee, the Department Head, the School committee and the Dean are all negative, the review will not proceed to the University level and the Dean shall notify the VPAA who will inform the applicant of the negative outcome and his or her right of appeal on procedural grounds in accordance with the University’s Appeal Policy and Procedure (AP24.0). 5.5 In all other cases, the Dean shall forward the review dossier to the VPAA who shall consider the recommendations of the department and the school, and make the decision. The VicePresident may, at his discretion, refer such cases to the University Appointments and Substantiation Committee (hereinafter referred to as the University Committee), appointed in accordance with the Policy on Substantiation, for advice before making the decision. The VPAA shall convey to

(2) This only applies before 1 July 2003. Effective from 1 July 2003, the Ascale salary and Bscale salary are merged to form the Sscale, and there is no more promotion from B to A scale. For details, please refer toAP09.0 on Faculty Rank and Salary.

6.

THE HONG KONG UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY Academic Personnel Policy and Procedure Manual POLICY ON ACADEMIC REVIEW

Date: Supersedes:

1 Jul 2003 28 Feb 1997

Section: Page:

AP20.0 4 of 6

the academic staff member being reviewed the results of the review and if the decision is negative, the VPAA shall also inform the faculty member's right of appeal on procedural grounds in accordance with the University’s Appeal Policy and Procedure (AP24.0). 5.6 The VPAA shall convey the decision of the review in a letter to the applicant, which will be passed on to the Department Head through the Dean, together with a gist of the rationales of the decision reached at the University level if the case has been reviewed at the University level. The Dean shall also convey to the Department Head the gist of the rationales of the recommendations at the School level. The Department Head shall deliver the letter to the applicant in person and have a discussion with the applicant on both positive and negative aspects of the case. 5.7 A flow chart illustrating the above process is inAnnex IIof this paper. Professor

6.1

6.2

6.3

6.4

The process described in this section applies to reviews of Professors and promotions to Professor of which the President is the approving authority.

Academic review at the Department level shall involve the academic staff of that Department (and, where deemed valuable, academic staff invited from outside the Department) in accordance with procedures established by each Department with the concurrence of the School Board. This review shall culminate with a Departmental report containing a recommendation and a summary of the pros and cons as these arose in the deliberations on the review. The Department Head shall consider the report of the Department, make a separate and independent recommendation with a statement of reasons, and forward the results of the review to the Dean.

The Dean shall refer such cases to the School Committee, appointed in accordance with the Policy on Substantiation, for advice before making the decision. The Dean shall consider the report of the School Committee and make a separate and independent recommendation with a statement of reasons.

If the recommendations of the Department Committee, the Department Head, the School Committee and the Dean are all negative, the review will not proceed to the University level and the Dean shall notify the VPAA who will inform the applicant of the negative outcome and his or her right of appeal on procedural grounds in accordance with the University’s Appeal Policy and Procedure (AP24.0).

THE HONG KONG UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY Academic Personnel Policy and Procedure Manual POLICY ON ACADEMIC REVIEW Date: 1 Jul 2003 Section: AP20.0 Supersedes: 28 Feb 1997 Page: 5 of 6 6.5 In all other cases, the Dean shall forward the review dossier to the VPAA who shall refer such cases to the University Committee for advice before making the decision. If the decision is positive, the VPAA shall forward the recommendation to the President for approval, who shall also inform the applicant the positive outcome if approved. If the decision is negative, the VPAA shall convey to the academic staff member being reviewed the negative outcome of the review and his or her right of appeal on procedural grounds in accordance with the University’s Appeal Policy and Procedure (AP24.0). 6.6 The VPAA shall convey the negative decision of the review in a letter to the applicant, which will be passed on to the Department Head through the Dean, together with a gist of the rationales of the decision reached at the University level if the case has been reviewed at the University level. The Dean shall also convey to the Department Head the gist of the rationales of the recommendations at the School level. The Department Head shall deliver the letter to the applicant in person and have a discussion with the applicant on both positive and negative aspects of the case. 6.7 A flow chart illustrating the above process is inAnnex IIIof this paper. 7. In the case of joint appointments across Departments, the Department designated as the "home Department" at the time of the appointment shall conduct the review, taking fully into account the views of the other Department(s). Joint appointments across Schools shall be treated in a similar manner.[This is section 9 of the previousversion dated 28 Feb 1997.] CRITERIA AND REVIEW PROCEDURES [Sections 8 to 11 below are sections 10 to 13 of the previous version dated 28 February 1997.] 8. The criteria and review procedures shall be generally consistent with those established for review of applications for substantiation, taking due account of the purpose for which the review is being undertaken. 9. The procedures at each level of review shall provide for the recording of a vote taken by secret ballot. The Chair of each Committee shall, in addition to recording the vote, prepare a report summarising the pros and cons of case as these arose in the Committee's deliberations. A minority report shall be included if submitted by one or more members of the Committee.

THE HONG KONG UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY Academic Personnel Policy and Procedure Manual POLICY ON ACADEMIC REVIEW Date: 1 Jul 2003 Section: AP20.0 Supersedes: 28 Feb 1997 Page: 6 of 6 10. No one other than the responsible academic administrator shall communicate with any review Committee on a case under review. Committee members shall not discuss any case under review outside the Committee.[The guidelines on confidentiality in academic reviews inAP20.5shall be observed in the review process.] 11. Academic staff may serve on Committees at more than one level of review. In the event that a case involving a member of a Committee is referred to that Committee for review, the member concerned shall be excused from all deliberations and votes relating to the case. 12. A faculty member who has been involved in a review at a previous level, e.g. as member of the department committee or as department head reviewing an application of his or her department, shall not vote on the case again at a higher level review if he or she happens to be a member of the higherlevel review committee. 13. The academic administrator (the Head, the Dean and the VPAA), who will review and make their own independent judgment on an application based on the recommendations of the relevant committees, shall not participate in the deliberation process of any review committee of his or her parallel or lower level (if appropriate). [The original section on appeal procedure in the previous version dated 28 February 1997 is replaced byAP24.0– Appeal Policy and Procedure.]

Review Initiated by DH

THE HONG KONG UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY Academic Personnel Policy and Procedure Manual POLICY ON ACADEMIC REVIEW

Date: Supersedes:

1 Jul 2003 28 Feb 1997

Academic Review Process for Assistant Professor*

Department Level Review

DH

Review

Report

Dept C’ttee

Review

Recommendation + Review Dossier

Dean

Review and decide

Report

School C’ttee

Review

School Level Review

Decision

Negative

Dean Inform reviewee negative outcome and right of appeal

DH : Dept C’ttee : School C’ttee :

Section: Page:

Positive

Annex I to AP20.0 1 of 1

Department Head Department Committee School Appointments and Substantiation Committee

* Applies to reviews for Assistant Professors of which the Dean is the approving authority.

nDea Approve and inform reviewee positive outcome

0.0Annex I to AP2

VPAA Inform reviewee negative outcome and right of appeal

Report Dept C’ttee

Review

Review initiated by DH

Review

Dean

DH

Review

Results

Outcome

* Applies to reviews for Associate Professors of which the VPAA is the approving authority.

Recommendation + Review Dossier

Section:

Page:

Positive Decision

Negative

University Level Review

1 of 1

28 Feb 1997

Academic Review Process for Associate Professor*

1 Jul 2003

Annex II to AP20.0

Annex II to AP20.0

No Report Univ C’ttee Yes Review by Univ C’ttee? Review

Review and decide

VPAA

Department Head DH : Dept C’ttee : Department Committee School C’ttee : School Appointments and Substantiation Committee Univ C’ttee : University Appointments and Substantiation Committee VPAA : VicePresident for Academic Affairs

Otherwise

VPAA Approve and inform reviewee positive outcome

Date:

School C’ttee

Dean Convey negative outcome to VPAA

Supersedes:

THE HONG KONG UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY Academic Personnel Policy and Procedure Manual POLICY ON ACADEMIC REVIEW

Department Level Review

VPAA Decide whether to refer case to Univ C’ttee

All negative

School Level Review

Review

Report

VPAA Inform reviewee negative outcome and right of appeal

University Level Review

Decision

Positive Decision

Recommendation + Review Dossier

Date:

Review

Supersedes:

Academic Review Process for Professor*

Annex III to AP20.0

Review

Report Dept C’ttee

Review

President

Section:

1 Jul 2003

28 Feb 1997

Page:

Negative VPAA Inform reviewee negative outcome and right of appeal

Review

VPAA Inform reviewee negative outcome and right of appeal

Results

Report

All negative Dean Convey negative outcome to VPAA

Negative

Report Univ C’ttee Otherwise Outcome Review

VPAA

Annex III to AP20.0

School Level Review

Positive

Department Level Review

evieR w initiated by DH

Dean

DH

Review

* Applies to reviews for Professors and promotions to Professor where the President  is the approving authority.

DH : Department Head Dept C’ttee : Department Committee School C’ttee : School Appointments and Substantiation Committee Univ C’ttee : University Appointments and Substantiation Committee cePresident for Academic AffairsVPAA : Vi

1 of 1

Review

THE HONG KONG UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY Academic Personnel Policy and Procedure Manual POLICY ON ACADEMIC REVIEW

School C’ttee

President Approve and inform reviewee positive outcome