FAQs

Discuss your plans with your line manager, then attend an ASUrise Introductory Workshop advertised on the ASU website and complete the Fellowship Category Tool. After this, express your interest in seeking Fellowship recognition by email to the ASDU –  asurise@asu.edu.bh. You will receive a reply within five working days notifying you about which cohort you will be attached to (there are two each year) and the name of your allocated mentor. If you are in any doubt about whether ASUrise is right for now, or if perhaps the taught provision available at ASU identified by title on page 9 would be better for you, contact the Director of ASDU.

Your completion of the Fellowship Category Tool will provide an indication of which category of Fellowship your practice and its impact are best aligned with. Be guided by the outcome of engaging with the tool, but also remember to make contact with your mentor, so you can start to develop your Record of Professional Activity (RPA). The examples within it will confirm, or not, whether you are best advised to seek recognition as an Associate Fellow (D1), Fellow (D2) or Senior Fellow (D3). Refer to pages 8 and 9 for an outline of who each category might be best suited to, noting that whereas Associate Fellow and Fellow are very much focused on direct work with learners, Senior Fellow requires evidence

of your effectiveness in leading and influencing others for the benefit of students and their learning.

It is possible that having attended the Introductory Workshop and completed the Fellowship Category Tool, you realise that you need to further develop your practice in advance of preparing your application. Support and encouragement to help you do this is available from the ASUrise Scheme Leader and also

your line manager who may well be able to identify projects and opportunities which would enable you

to develop your practice aligned with descriptor requirements.

No, you select the category you think is appropriate to your practice and its impact. You may return to the Scheme in the future to gain recognition against another category at a later stage in your career. This will enable you to benchmark the continuing development of your practice in line with descriptor requirements.

To support your progression through the process of preparing your claim, you will be allocated to a cohort. This cohort approach offers a supportive space in which to articulate and evaluate your practice. Each cohort runs over a period of time equivalent to a semester. Once you have joined the cohort you will be expected to submit on the due date published within the VLE space. However how long it actually takes you to prepare your application within this time period will vary according to your individual circumstances and will depend on what evidence you have to draw upon, what you might need to do and what other commitments you have.

You should discuss your plans for applying for Fellowship recognition with your line manager, usually as part of the appraisal process. They have a role in supporting you to prepare your allocation by encouraging you and they may be one of your referees who provides a supporting statement.

You can draw on a range of evidence to demonstrate how you have developed as an academic and/ or supporter of learning. The evidence you present in the form of examples of your practice needs to be retrospective – put differently examples need to look back at what you have done and what the impact of your action was.

Associate Fellowship and Fellowship applications are built using examples from the last 3 years. Senior Fellowship applications draw from the last 5 years. If you have an older example that you wish to include, you are advised to speak with your mentor in the first instance.

Yes. Your application relates to you as a professional, rather than your current role at ASU, however the experience must have been gained in a higher education context.

More than you might think! The following are all possible examples which extend beyond the obvious practice of teaching and/ or supporting learning. Think about participation in workshops and conferences; peer observations; corridor conversations about teaching and learning; participation in collaborative projects about teaching and learning; contribution to academic debate through social media; writing for publication; pedagogic research and scholarship; evaluation; contribution to your disciplinary or professional association; external examining; engagement with quality assurance and enhancement procedures; involvement in special interest groups and committees. Remember to reflect on the impact of engaging in these activities, in other words: what has this meant for your professional practice and the student learning experience?

Associate Fellowship applicants submit just one supporting statement. It would be highly unusual for the referee to be from outside ASU. However, Fellowship and Senior Fellowship applicants submit two supporting statements. If you have recently joined the University and will be presenting practice from previous employment in your application, you will likely be advised to ensure that one of your referees can vouch for your practice in that context. The other supporting statement will need to come from within ASU.

The reviewers are looking for a clear picture of your practice in teaching and/ or the support of learning and an insight into who you are, how you approach your role and the evidence-base for what you do. It is just as appropriate to evaluate your challenges and difficulties and how you have addressed them, as it is to analyse and celebrate your successes. Aim for an open and constructive account, rather than a

‘look how wonderful I am’ type approach.

Your examples should be informed by your scholarship, or by research, or your professional learning, or other evidence-informed approaches. Amongst these options, you are strongly encouraged to draw on the pedagogic literature. Look in the ASU Library, and in the ASUrise Moodle space for useful resources. Please note: As you know, ASU has an Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism Policy with clear rules and regulations, ensuring that students understand what is expected from them and the need to comply with the bounds of the academic integrity. ASU provides e-detection software (TurnitIn) for academic integrity of written coursework. ASUrise, with no exception, uses ASU’s policy and ASU’s e-detection software (TurnitIn) for all applications and supporting statements to check any detection of plagiarism, and to ensure compliance with the policy’s rules and regulations. Staff suspected of academic misconduct will be dealt with, via the Staff Disciplinary Procedure. You will have been made aware of the application of ASU’s plagiarism policy within ASUrise at the induction and introductory sessions, in addition your mentor will restate the importance of the academic integrity in your application. Applicants can appeal in case of a decision on academic cheating or malpractice penalties through a Disciplinary and Appeal Committees for further actions.

Your mentor is your primary support; however, you are free to talk with colleagues who are working on their Fellowship submission at the same time as you. In addition, members of the ASUrise Alumni Network will also be delighted to offer insight. However, do remember that there is a risk in talking to too many people, as it might lead to continuing the discussion rather than progressing the development of your RPA and your claim.  It is also possible that you might inadvertently be misdirected because the person/ people you speak with may have gained their Fellowship under the 2011 version of the Professional Standards Framework. So do keep the conversation going with your mentor throughout.

Each cohort has a set deadline; you need to submit your application on time. If this is not possible you need to inform the ASUrise Scheme Leader.

It is centrally managed by the Academic Staff Development Unit, with the support of the ASUrise Team which is drawn from across the University. The team includes mentors and reviewers all of whom must engage with annual training to ensure that their support and guidance (mentors) and decision making (reviewers) is robust and consistent.

Please note that ASUrise operates a shadowing system5 for both new mentors and new reviewers. It is designed to ensure preparedness for their respective roles and seeks to enable you to trust the process of support (mentors) and decision making (reviewers) of the Scheme. If there is a shadow reviewer in place for your application, they will have NO part in making the provisional review decision.

For submissions for Associate Fellow and Fellow recognition, each application is considered by two Internal Reviewers; for Senior Fellow recognition there are three Internal Reviewers. Each Internal Reviewer completes his/her ASUrise Fellowship Scheme Reviewer Decision Making Sheet independently – see Appendix 6. The two/three reviewers then meet to discuss their independent decision and to confirm a provisional decision.

Provisional decisions are presented to the Fellowship Scheme Board chaired by a senior member of the University who sits outside of the ASUrise team. Ahead of the Board sitting, an External Reviewer will have sampled applications across the three categories to ensure robust, consistent decision making in line with the standard set by Advance HE. (see section 8.16 for further detail about their role).

For each submission, the provisional outcome reported to the Board will be one of:

•    Successful

•    Referred – some part(s) of the Descriptor requirements is(are) not met, revisions required

Internal Reviewers:

Internal Reviewers are colleagues from across the University who hold Senior or Principal Fellowship and have been trained6 to ensure they are fully appraised of PSF 2023 and its requirements for each category of Fellowship. This enables the process of review to be robust and consistent7. Prior to the review process commencing both you and the reviewers will have completed a conflict-of-interest form

– available for you to see in the ASUrise VLE space – to manage the risk of bias towards or prejudice against.

As noted above, each Internal Reviewer makes an independent decision, prior to documenting that decision. The Internal Reviewers then agree a provisional decision, noting that a consensus decision is possible in respect of a Senior Fellow application. If reviewers are unable to agree a decision for AFHEA or FHEA claims, then the ASUrise Scheme Leader will be notified, and a 3rd reviewer appointed. Such

5  Shadowing is as it sounds, the individual shadows an experienced mentor or reviewer through the process of mentoring or reviewing.

6 This training in mandatory and must be undertaken annually.

7 Within any review period, a reviewer might also be a mentor. However, a reviewer will have no part in the decision making for someone they have mentored.

a claim would always be part of the External Reviewer’s sample and if necessary, will be discussed at the Board. In the event of a ‘referred’ decision, the Lead Internal Reviewer completes a Panel Outcome/

Feedback form (see Appendix 7 for the template documents).

External Reviewer:

The External Reviewer is appointed in compliance with Advance HE policy and plays a very specific role, which is to ensure that Fellowship decisions are robust and consistent made in line with the requirements set out in the Advance HE policy in respect of external moderation. They also play a role in  supporting the  continuing quality enhancement of  ASUrise  throughout their  observations and feedback reflected at the ASUrise Fellowship Board which they attend virtually.

The External Examiner has access to all applications and all of the decision-making forms and panel outcome documents, if the application has been referred. S/he will:

•    Sample across each category, looking specifically at any submissions to which they are directed by the team and all applications where Fellowship has not been awarded

•    Review all resubmissions.

•    Be part of the decision-making process at the ASUrise Fellowship Board where the provisional decisions made by the Internal Reviewers are ratified

•    Report formally on quality assurance and quality enhancement processes relating to the participant experience and appropriateness of Fellowship decision making, in line with Advance HE requirements. This report is formally presented to the ASUrise Fellowship Board and forms part of the ASUrise Annual Report submitted to the Advance HE and to the University’s Learning, Teaching and Assessment Committee.

NOTE: For the first year after PSF 2023’s introduction, the External Reviewer will be one of the three reviewers for all Senior Fellow applications.

The ASUrise Fellowship Scheme Board is chaired by the Director of the Quality Assurance and Accreditation Centre at ASU. The role of the Board is to ratify reviewer decision making and to ensure effectiveness and enhancement of the Scheme and enable it to inform quality developments in the University as a whole. The Board reports to the University’s Learning, Teaching and Assessment Committee (which itself reports to the QAA Council, which then reports to the University Council). On an annual basis, the Board will receive a report prepared by the ASDU on the operation of the Scheme during the academic year and approve this for onward transmission to Advance HE.

The Board consists of the Chair, the ASUrise Scheme Leader and the External Reviewer and also includes the Internal Reviewers making the decisions for the cohort being presented.  Its Terms of Reference are provided below.

The ASUrise Team commits to informing you by email within three working days following the relevant

Fellowship Scheme Board meeting.

If your application is referred, you will be given detailed feedback (prepared by the Internal Reviewers and approved by the Board) and advised on how you can meet Descriptor requirements. This feedback will be provided in writing within three working days of the Board meeting, with the option of a one-to-

one discussion with one of the Reviewers if you would like that too. You will also be able to discuss the

revisions you need to make with your mentor, taking no more than one hour of their time.

You will have 4 weeks from the date the outcome of the Board is sent to make the necessary amendments to your application, using a different colour to show exactly where the changes have been made. Your revised application will then be reviewed by the original reviewers (wherever possible) and seen by the External Reviewer enabling a provisional decision to be presented to the Chair of the Fellowship Board for their ratification. Importantly, Chair’s Action decisions will be formally reported to the next sitting of the Board to ensure accuracy of the audit trail.

Please note: You cannot appeal the decision of the Fellowship Board, but if you believe that processes were not followed, you can seek redress. Further information on how and when you can do this are provided for you in the ASUrise VLE space.

These include:

•    The ASUrise Scheme and the transparency of its review processes

•    Independent Internal Reviewer decision making

•    Moderation of claims by the External Reviewer

•    An appeals process conducted through a body independent of the Board 8

•    A requirement to declare conflict of interest (participants and reviewers)

•    Evaluation and feedback opportunities for participants, mentors and reviewers

First of all, celebrate! You have been recognised for your practice and its impact is a globally-recognised benchmark. Your eCertificate will be sent to you by Advance HE and you will be entitled to use the appropriate post nominals (AFHEA /FHEA /SFHEA). You will also receive an invitation to join the ASUrise Alumni Network. You are strongly encouraged to take this opportunity because the Network provides a University-wide forum to promote pedagogic discussion, scholarship and research which enables sharing of good practice recognised by Fellowship success. Please also remember that after your Fellowship is conferred you are expected to adhere to the  Fellowship Code of Practice and to remain in good standing.