Drapers’ Teaching Fellows Scheme
1.Introduction and rationale
1.1The Drapers’ Teaching Fellows Scheme is a new scheme established by Queen Mary to recognise and reward excellence in teaching and the support of student learning.
1.2The scheme is not time-limited, and staff may make applications at any time in the year, with applications being judged and Fellowships awarded twice yearly, in November and May. Applications will be judged by a panel of experienced members of College staff. As a criteria-based scheme, there would be no limit on the number of staff who could become Drapers’ Fellows, as long as they meet the criteria set for the scheme. In order to ensure that the scheme does reward excellence, it is necessary that these criteria are set at a high level. Award of a Fellowship would be for a three year term, after which a member of staff would be required to re-apply if they wished to remain as a Drapers’ Teaching Fellow. In exceptional circumstances, the panel may wish to award Life Fellowship to those who display outstanding contribution to the College.
1.3It is intended that award of a Drapers’ Teaching Fellowship would be used as part of the decision-making for selection for staff for the National Teaching Fellowships Scheme (NTFS).
1.4The criteria for the scheme are based on those used in awarding National Teaching Fellowships, as well as the UK Professional Standards Framework. Applications will, like the NTFS, be graded against the criteria by the panel members, and a system for deciding on the award of the Fellowship is outlined below.
2.Application process
2.1Any member of staff who is involved in teaching or supporting the learning of students of the College may apply to become a Draper’s Teaching Fellow.
2.2Staff may apply at any time. Applications should be made electronically tothe Centre for Academic and Professional Development by email .
2.3To apply for the Scheme, members of staff are asked to complete an application form, comprising a series of statements which addresses the criteria and giving examples of evidence to illustrate how their practice demonstrates suitability for an award for excellence in teaching. The application must incorporate evaluation of their teaching. Examples of other supporting evidence may include (but need not be confined to): feedback from peer observations, feedback from other national engagements, student support materials and work with other partner institutions, and organisations.
2.4As part of the application process, a statement of support must be received from an applicant's Head of School or Institute, which should compose a statement outlining their support for the application and which will concisely set out the basis of the claim for excellence in teaching, with reference to the criteria for the Scheme. .
2.5Applicants must also supply a list of the evidence which they have to support their application. The Panel reserves the right to request submission of copies of all of some of this evidence for any application.
2.6Applicants must also submit a CV of not more than 2,000 words.
2.7Individuals from various academic disciplines inevitably demonstrate different communication and analytical styles and this will be accounted for in the assessment process. As such there is no ‘style’ that is expected in applications and examples will be assessed and marked for their contribution to the criteria as a whole.
2.8If a Head of Department or Director of Institute does not wish to support a nomination they must submit a written declaration that they do not wish to support the application, together with reasons, if appropriate, and this should be communicated to the applicant by the Head of School or Director of Institute.
2.9Applications and statements of support received six weeks before the date for the panel meeting will be put together and forwarded to the panel meeting. Applications and statements of support received after this date may be forwarded to the following meeting of the panel.
2.10Unsuccessful applicants may re-apply, but they must indicate how the application has been improved. Duplicate applications will automatically be rejected.
3.Decision-making process
3.1Decisions on Fellowships will be made by a panel of experienced College staff who will meet twice a year, in November and May. This meeting may be in person, or virtual. The 2012/13 panel is included as Appendix 1 of this paper. Panel members may wish to be considered for Fellowship. In this case, they would be required simply to absent themselves from discussions of their own case at a meeting.
3.2Each complete application will be sent to two members of the panel for assessment: one member from a cognate discipline, a second from an unrelated discipline or from the Learning Institute. The assessors will make recommendations as outlined in the section on criteria below, and give brief feedback for the applicant.
3.3If both assessors grade an application as ‘Alpha’, the Fellowship will normally be awarded without further panel discussion. Similarly, if both assessors grade an application as ‘Gamma’, the Fellowship will normally not be awarded without further panel discussion.
3.4Applications which are judged as ‘Beta’, or where the assessors disagree will be placed on the agenda for discussion at the panel meeting. At this meeting, the panel will formally approve awards to those who have been graded as ‘Alpha’, and will make decisions on other cases. It is proposed that only in exceptional circumstances will Fellowship be awarded to applicants to whom at least one assessor has not judged as being of ‘Alpha’ quality, although the panel discussion may decide to upgrade an application and therefore make the award of the Fellowship.
3.5There is no right of appeal against a decision of the panel, but members of staff may make as many re-applications as they wish.
3.6Feedback will begiven to all unsuccessful applicants, together with suggestions for ways in which a future application might be enhanced and improved.
4.Criteria and assessment decisions
4.1Criteria and assessment decisions can be found at Appendices 2 and 3 of this document.
4.2The criteria have been closely based on the criteria and decisions from the National Teaching Fellowship Scheme[1], and have been linked to the UK Professional Standards Framework for Teaching and Supporting Learning in Higher Education[2]. The criteria proposed are the same as those used for the NTFS scheme, but they have been explicitly linked to the UK PSF.
4.3The proposed decisions are a simplified version of those from the NTFS scheme.
4.4The NTFS scheme has been modelled closely for two reasons. Firstly, it provides a tested background for award of Fellowships on a criteria basis and, secondly, it means that award of a Drapers’ Teaching Fellowship can be more easily linked to possible submission as a College nominee for the national scheme.
4.Reporting of awards
4.1An annual report will be produced which will outline all those newly awarded a Drapers Teaching Fellowship, application data by Faculty and a list of those continuing in Fellowship. These reports will be sent to Senate and Council. A list of all those holding Fellowships will be maintained on the Learning Institute website, and heads of departments/directors of institutes will be informed of the outcomes of applications from staff in their department/institute, as will Deans for Taught Programmes and Executive Deans for Faculties.
5Duration of Fellowship
5.1The Drapers’ Fellowship will be held for three years from the date of the panel meeting at which the Fellowship was awarded. On expiry of this term, a further application must be made for the Fellowship to be renewed.
5.2In exceptional circumstances, the panel may wish to award Life Fellowship. This may be for an outstanding contribution, or in recognition of an external award. For instance, a Life Fellowship may be awarded to a member of staff who is awarded a National Teaching Fellowship, or equivalent award. Life Fellowship may also be awarded to a member of staff on receipt of a third consecutive term as a Drapers’ Teaching Fellow.
Matthew Williamson
February 2014
Appendix 1 – Awarding panel
In the Chair:
Professor Susan Dilly, Vice-Principal (Teaching and Learning)
Senior members of academic staff:
Dr James Busfield (S&E)
Dr Helen Bruce (SMD)
Dr Omar Garcia (HSS)
Dr Peter Howarth (HSS)
Professor Julia Shelton (S&E)
Professor Anthony Warrens (SMD)
From the CAPD:
Dr Matthew Williamson
Appendix 2 - Proposed criteria
Criterion 1
Individual excellence: evidence of enhancing and transforming the student learning experience commensurate with the individual’s context and the opportunities afforded by it.
This should show links to the following sections of the UKPSF:
Areas of activity
1. Design and plan learning activities and/or programmes of study
2. Teach and/or support student learning
3. Assess and give feedback to learners
Core knowledge
Knowledge and understanding of:
1. The subject material
2. Appropriate methods for teaching and learning in the subject area and at the level of the academic programme
3. How students learn, both generally and in the subject/disciplinary area(s)
4. The use and value of appropriate learning technologies
Professional values
1. Respect for individual learners and diverse learning communities
and may, for example, be demonstrated by providing evidence of:
- stimulating students’ curiosity and interest in ways which inspire a commitment to learning,
- organising and presenting high quality resources in coherent and imaginative ways which in turn clearly enhance students’ learning,
- recognising and actively supporting the full diversity of student learning needs,
- engaging with and contributing to the established literature or to the nominee’s own evidence base for teaching and learning.
Criterion 2
Raising the profile of excellence: evidence of supporting colleagues and influencing support for student learning and/or demonstrating impact and engagement beyond the nominee’s immediate academic or professional role.
This should show links to the following sections of the UKPSF:
Areas of activity
4. Develop effective learning environments and approaches to student support and guidance
Core knowledge
Knowledge and understanding of:
6. The implications of quality assurance and quality enhancement for academic and professional practice with a particular focus on teaching
Professional values
2. Promote participation in higher education and equality of opportunity for learners
4. Acknowledge the wider context in which higher education operates recognizing the implications for professional practice
and may, for example, be demonstrated by providing evidence of:
- making outstanding contributions to colleagues’ professional development in relation to promoting and enhancing student learning,
- contributing to departmental/faculty/institutional/national initiatives to facilitate student learning,
- drawing upon the results of relevant research, scholarship and professional practice in ways which add value to teaching and students’ learning,
- contributing to and/or supporting meaningful and positive change with respect to pedagogic practice, policy and/or procedure.
Criterion 3
Developing excellence: evidence of the nominee’s commitment to her/his ongoing professional development with regard to teaching and learning and/or learning support.
This should show links to the following sections of the UKPSF:
Areas of activity
5.Engage in continuing professional development in subjects/disciplines and their pedagogy, incorporating research, scholarship, and evaluation of professional practices
Core knowledge
Knowledge and understanding of:
5. Methods for evaluating the effectiveness of teaching
Professional values
3. Use evidence-informed approaches and the outcomes from research, scholarship and continuing professional development
and may, for example, be demonstrated by providing evidence of:
- ongoing review and enhancement of individual professional practice,
- engaging in professional development activities which enhance the nominee’s expertise in teaching and learning support,
- engaging in the review and enhancement of one’s own professional and/or academic practice,
- specific contributions to significant improvements in the student learning experience.
Appendix 3 – Assessment decisions
Alpha
The submission provides clear evidence that the nominee:
- meets the criterion in explicit and relevant ways.
- demonstrates that s/he has made an outstanding contribution to student learning.
- has raised the profile and/or standard of learning and teaching through his/her work in the given context.
- demonstrates a commitment to raising the status of teaching and learning in the future.
The evidence provided toward this criterion is commensurate with that expected of a Drapers’ Teaching Fellow.
Beta
The submission:
- demonstrates substantial but incomplete fulfilment of the criterion.
- offers specific and relevant evidence which is, however, insufficient in terms of breadth and/or depth.
- demonstrates that the nominee has, to some degree, helped to raise the profile and/or standard of learning and teaching.
- demonstrates a commitment to raising the status of teaching and learning in higher education.
Gamma
The submission:
- Does not explicitly demonstrate fulfilment of the criterion.
- Provides little or no explicit and/or relevant evidence of meeting the criterion.
The evidence provided in this submission is not commensurate with the standard expected of a Drapers’ Teaching Fellow.
1 of 7
[1] NTFS from the HE Academy website at:
[2] UK PSF from the HE Academy website at: