Peer evaluation and the UBB Excellence Initiative Prof. dr. Andrei Mărcuș - vice-rector Gelu Gherghin – Centre for Quality Management Danube Rectors’ Conference. University of Excelence. Teaching, Learning, Research and Community Services 4th - 7th November, 2010, Cluj-Napoca BABEȘ-BOLYAI UNIVERSITY’ EXCELLENCE COMPETITION 2010 • Rector’s initiative – December 2009 • Peer valuation in Romania: - professorships (CNATDCU) - research grants (CNCSIS) - UBB internal competitions UBB - EXCELLENCE COMPETITION 2010 DOCUMENTS • Strategy to obtain and consecrate excellence in UBB’s performance • The participation of UBB in competitions for recognition of Excellence • Students as partners. The statements of UBB’s Rector, regarding the Excellence Policy • Criteria for the recognition of Excellence within Babeș-Bolyai University • Excellence Competition 2010 - Methodology UBB EXCELLENCE COMPETITION 2010 DEBATES • Fields • Categories • Criteria (Inspiration from CHE ExcellenceRanking, THE-QS, Shanghai ARWU, CNCSIS 2010 – Excellence in Research, U-Map, U-Multirank) • What to report, especially in fields like arts, sports? • Assigning Points? UBB EXCELLENCE COMPETITION 2010 FIELDS Mathematics Political Science and International Computer Science Relations Physics Communication Sciences and Media Chemistry Sociology, Anthropology and Social Geology Work Geography Psychology Biology Educational Sciences Chemical Engineering, Physical Education and Sport Biotechnology, Food Engineering Philosophy and Security History Environmental Science and Theology Engineering Philology Legal and Administrative Sciences Cinema and Performing Arts Economic Sciences Music UBB EXCELLENCE COMPETITION 2010 CATEGORIES • Research groups • Research and services groups • Personalities • Bachelor Programmes • Master Programmes • Doctoral / Postdoctoral Programmes INDICATORS - CHE EXCELLENCE RANKING Number of publications in Web of Science Citations (normalized) Outstanding researchers Number of projects in the Marie Curie programme Student mobility Teaching staff mobility Erasmus-Mundus Master programmes Book citations http://www.excellenceranking.org/eusid/EUSID INDICATORS: THE-QS WORLD UNIV RANKINGS Indicator Description Weight Academic Peer Composite score drawn from peer review Review survey 40% (divided into five subject areas) Employer Review Score based on responses to employer survey. 10% Faculty Student Ratio Score based on student faculty ratio 20% Citations per Faculty Score based on research performance factored 20% against the size of the research body International Faculty Score based on proportion of international 5% http://www.topuniversities.com faculty International Score based on proportion of international 5% Students students http://www.topuniversities.com THE WORLD UNIV RANKINGS 2010-2011 “objective”, “rigorous”, “robust”, “transparent” Citation - research influence 32,50% Citation impact (normalised average citations per paper) 32,50% Research - volume, income and reputation 30 % Reputational survey - research 19,50% Papers per academic and research staff 4,50% Research income (scaled) 5,25% Public reseach /total research income 0,75% Teaching - the learning environment 30% Reputational survey – teaching 15% Income per academic 2,25% PhD awards per academic 6% PhD awards/bachelor’s awards 2,25% Undergraduates admitted per academic 4,5% International mix - staff and students 5% Ratio of international to domestic staff 3% Ratio of international to domestic students 2% Industry income - innovation 2,5% Research income from industry (per academic staff) 2,5% http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/world-university-rankings/ ACADEMIC RANKING OF WORLD UNIVERSITIES (ARWU - SHANGHAI) Criteria Indicator Weight Education Quality Alumni of an institution winning 10% Nobel Prizes and Fields Medals Nobel Prizes and Fields Medals 20% Faculty Quality Highly cited researchers in 21 broad 20% subjects Articles published in Nature and Science 20% Research Output Articles Indexed in Science Citation Index- 20% Expanded and Social Science Citation Index Per Capita Performance http://www.arwu.org Per capita academic performance 10% http://www.arwu.org CNCSIS 2010 – EXCELLENCE IN RESEARCH 4. Primary performance criteria 4.1. ISI publications 4.2. Patents 4.3 Research grants 5. Secondary performance criteria 5.1. Papers published in indexed journals 5.2. Papers published at international conferences 6. Qualitative performance criteria 6.1. Products and technologies 7. Professional prestige 7.1. Invited talks at prestigious international 7.5. Members of the Romanian conferences Academy 7.2. Visiting professor at prestigious 7.6. PhD Advisors universities 7.3. Leadership positions in international 7.7. National prizes granted by the organizations Romanian Academy and by CNCSIS U-MAP, U-MULTIRANK U-MAP U-MULTIRANK a tool to create a multidimensional classification “transparency of diversity” • educational profile • multidimensional perspective of • student profile “institutional profiles” • research involvement • no overall “league table” • knowledge exchange • no composite indicators • international orientation • two-level analysis (institutional and “field”) • regional engagement • stakeholders driven approach http://www.u-map.eu FIRST PROPOSAL OF INDICATORS The assessment involves a qualitative analysis of the contributions, not just their counting A. Personalities • books, papers and patents positively cited in the international system B. Research groups • individual performance of group members, according to the criteria from A. • income generating contracts with companies • international research projects (FP7, etc.) • international researchers in the group C. Post-Graduate Programs (Masters / PhD) • individual performance of teachers, as in A. • international publications of PhD students. • Participation in international programs (Erasmus Mundus, etc.). • International students in the program. • International teachers involved in the program. FINAL LIST OF INDICATORS 1. Research programs - national and international publications relevant in the field; fundamental conferences organized in the field; technological impact, domestic and foreign master/PhD students attracted; national and international grants, national and internationals awards; internationally relevant journals published. 2. Personalities - international publications relevant in the field, visiting professor at prestigious universities; invited speaker at relevant international conferences; citation in national and international literature; membership in the boards of international journals; national awards; postgraduates students attracted; financial resources attracted; membership in international professional committees; international expertise. FINAL LIST OF INDICATORS 3. Master, PhD, Postoctoral programmes - papers published by scietific advisor/doctoral school, cited in international literature; international awards; national awards; the impact of the doctoral school results in society; the number of domestic and foreign master and PhD students attracted; graduates employed in important positions, in relevant institutions. 4. Bachelor programmes - cited papers of the academic staff; international awards; national awards; the impact of the academic staff works in society; the number of domestic and foreign students attracted; graduates employed in important positions, in relevant institutions. 5. Research and services groups EVALUATION: ART OR SCIENCE ? • Definitely, it is not science, but methodologies can examined ! • Institutional and individual rankings depend on the methodology • The use of statistical indicators in individual appraisal in not appropriate REFERENCES UBB (2010). Criteria for the recognition of Excellence within Babeș-Bolyai University http://www.arwu.org http://www.excellenceranking.org/eusid/EUSID http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/world-university- rankings http://www.topuniversities.com http://www.u-map.eu S. Berghoff et al. (2009, 2010). Identifying the Best: The CHE Excellence Ranking for Natural Science, Economics, Political Science and Psychology in Europe. REFERENCES Dehon, C., McCathie and V. Verardi (2009) Uncovering excellence in academic rankings: a closer look at the Shanghai ranking. J.-C. Billaut, D. Bouyssou and Ph. Vincke. (2009) Should you believe in the Shanghai ranking? An MCDM view. J. Ewing, R. Adler and P. Taylor. (2008) Joint IMU/ICIAM/IMS-Committee on Quantitative Assessment of Research. A report on Citation Statistics.
Pages to are hidden for
"Slide 1 - Universitatea Babes - Bolyai_ Cluj - Napoca"Please download to view full document