The summary should indicate whether the application has been treated as interdisciplinary and/or whether allowance has been made for any additional considerations, indicating in each case what action has been taken and the reasons for this. It was agreed that, on the basis of the references and on the other evidence before the Committee, Dr X should be awarded as follows for each of the evaluative criteria. [Comment, if any: please note that the Faculty Promotion Committee should also provide comment in relation to each criterion on Document 7A which is disclosable for the purpose of feedback. Such comments should be anonymised. (8.24 of the guidance).] Others Repeat as for Dr X. Summary List The following list provides a ranking of the relative strengths of the cases for promotion to personal Professorships considered above: Applicant Ranking Ra Overall Banding* Score Score (max 50) R/S T GC R/S T GC (1-30)** (1-10) (1-10) X * Performance Descriptors: OE, SE, CE, IE, CU ** Score range of 1-30 will be applied 6. Applications for personal Readership Dr Y. [Summary assessment of the evidence in relation to the criteria below: Research/Scholarship There must be international recognition in the relevant subject with reference to: (i) originality (ii) contribution to the advancement of knowledge (iii) reputation Teaching General Contribution The summary should indicate whether the application has been treated as interdisciplinary and/or whether allowance has been made for any additional considerations, indicating in each case what action has been and the reasons for this. It was agreed that, on the basis of the references and on the other evidence before the Committee, Dr Y should be awarded as follows for each of the evaluative criteria. [Comment, if any: please note that the Faculty Promotion Committee should also provide comment in relation to each criterion on Document 7B which is disclosable for the purpose of feedback. Such comments should be anonymised. (8.24 of the guidance).]
The summary should indicate whether the application has been treated as interdisciplinary and/or whether allowance has been made for any additional considerations, indicating in each case what action has been taken and the reasons for this. It was agreed that, on the basis of the references and on the other evidence before the Committee, Dr X should be awarded as follows for each of the evaluative criteria. [Comment, if any: please note that the Faculty Promotion Committee should also provide comment in relation to each criterion on Document 7A which is disclosable for the purpose of feedback. Such comments should be anonymised. (8.24 of the guidance).] Others Repeat as for Dr X. Summary List The following list provides a ranking of the relative strengths of the cases for promotion to personal Professorships considered above: Applicant Ranking Ra Overall Score Banding* Score (max 50) R/S T GC R/S (1-30)** T (1-10) GC (1-10) X * Performance Descriptors: OE, SE, CE, IE, CU ** Score range of 1-30 will be applied 6. Applications for personal Readership Dr Y. [Summary assessment of the evidence in relation to the criteria below: Research/Scholarship There must be international recognition in the relevant subject with reference to: (i) originality (ii) contribution to the advancement of knowledge (iii) reputation Teaching General Contribution The summary should indicate whether the application has been treated as interdisciplinary and/or whether allowance has been made for any additional considerations, indicating in each case what action has been and the reasons for this. It was agreed that, on the basis of the references and on the other evidence before the Committee, Dr Y should be awarded as follows for each of the evaluative criteria. [Comment, if any: please note that the Faculty Promotion Committee should also provide comment in relation to each criterion on Document 7B which is disclosable for the purpose of feedback. Such comments should be anonymised. (8.24 of the guidance).]