skip to content

Each institution may adapt the framework SRD scheme to reflect the size of the institution/local practice, and to increase the scheme's usefulness. Therefore, while the SRD discussion may often take the form of a meeting between a senior academic (reviewer) and an academic (reviewee), in some institutions a reviewing committee or peer review may be preferred. In small institutions, an agreement could be reached that reviewers are selected from another cognate institution(s) further to a request by the academic or from the Head of Institution suggesting this would be appropriate, with the relevant Head of Institution signing off the SRD form.

However, a general guide to selecting reviewers is as follows:

  • Senior academics act as reviewers for more junior academic staff.
  • Professors are reviewed by the Head of Institution.
  • Heads of Institution are reviewed by the relevant Head of School.
  • The academic being reviewed can ask the Head of Institution to nominate an alternative reviewer from the academic initially allocated.

Reviewers and those being reviewed

Academics acting as reviewers and those being reviewed have a key role in engaging positively and constructively in the SRD process. It is recommended that new reviewers attend appraisal training organised through PPD, with existing reviewers attending refresher training at least every four years. Academic staff being reviewed may find it helpful to attend an SRD briefing session (through PPD) before their first discussion.