Pokemon Emerald Infinite Item

Evaluation National Council of Universities

Nice effort on the list " For Quality Research 'in Section 05 of the National University Council which sets out the evaluation criteria used during recruitment campaigns lecturers (the "qualifying") and promotion of lecturers and professors.
Note that the list " Pluralism Quality and "also offers (and since a lease) bcp info on competitions.

QQ remarks on the evaluation of research.

• With a Little Help From My Friends

From what I understand (but I could be wrong, do not hesitate to post a comment if I digress), a single article published an article with several co-authors have the Similarly for the researcher is evaluated. There is an incentive to share knowledge and to divide tasks is totally commendable. But the treatment is unfair to those who are working alone (especially since the inclusion of the H-index values already those who work more )....
To overcome this problem, some jury aggregation have established a preferential system: the number of points reported by an article is placed at the root of many authors. I remember the cries of outrage that some had pushed when this measure was also published and incentives that had led to the style "leaves to publish more, it is better to publish in major journals. This kind of incentive is beneficial for the profession, it strengthens the fellowship necessary to achieve excellence and avoid the bias to publish go-go and more research of low quality (diffusion of responsibility , stowaway ... yuck!)

• results!

Give info about the criteria is a good thing, but give information on the results would be even better. In any box, employees have individual meetings where they discuss the evolution of their careers in college nada. To find out whether you will get qualification without problem, or if it is time for you to request a promo EAD, you should check the info for yourself, compare the resumes of your cohort, those of past generations ... short, it is very imperfect and a priori it should remain so. For example with the mode of computation, one can recalculate its research note, but what about note of the other candidates and quid other scores in terms of teaching and administration.
Now that the criteria are defined, the statistical distribution of the notes (at least the average, min and max) of those who obtain the qualification and promotions would be useful to the community so that choices can be done in a proper information framework.


FC