Annes No. 1 to Dean´s Directive No. 13/2024 ****************************************************************************************** * ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** * Annex No. 1 to Dean´s Directive No. 13/2024: Areas and criteria for Evaluation ****************************************************************************************** The areas and criteria for evaluation vary for different types of employees. The core of t for academic staff is scientific and teaching activities, for researchers it is scientific lecturers it is teaching activities. An employee's performance is assessed over a 5-year period unless otherwise determined by Committee. If an employee's employment is for less than 5 years, activities are evaluated of the employee's employment with the faculty. Self-assessment and activity reporting is done in an electronic staff appraisal applicatio the areas assessed and automatically downloads data from OBD and SIS. If the application i the evaluation is conducted outside the application using forms supplied by the Career Dev Quality Education Department. *========================================================================================= * I. Areas and evaluation criteria *========================================================================================= ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ A. Publication and other creative activities ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ One of the pillars of academic staff evaluation is their publication activity. The evaluat receives an overview of all publications of the employee from the personal bibliographic d (hereinafter referred to as "OBD") for the last 5 years. As part of the self-assessment, t member will select up to 5 of his/her publications over the last 5 years that he/she consi best. In justified cases, these best results can be selected for up to 8 years (e.g. unpai abroad, maternity leave, administrative and expert ). Given that full-time faculty activit only publications reported to the faculty can be included in the 5 selected outcomes. For publication, the employee shall add a commentary explaining the quality of the publication its selection, and, if applicable, its acclaim (reviews), etc. In the case of co-authored staff member shall verbally specify his/her contribution in the evaluation (not only by pe by a precise description of what his/her contribution consisted of). The employee may include in the self-assessment the number of citations of his/her publica self-citations) according to one of the methodologies (Web of Science, Scopus, Google Scho may attach a nominal list of references (citations) identified by him/her or the H-index. additional or explanatory comment. Selected best publications When evaluating scientific and other creative activities, the committee will focus on the results (see above). The evaluation focuses on quality, not quantity. The ideal in evaluation is an excellent publication that: a.represents a major contribution to research, preferably on an international ; b.it is the result of original research and brings a new perspective on the topic (either original interpretation or new data and their analysis and interpretation) and is also a with a broader thematic or theoretical-methodological impact; c.is typically published by a quality publishing house or periodical with a thorough peer- and a high level of competition for texts offered by authors for publication. The excellent publications are published in a language that is a must-read for internation on the subject. Usually this will be English, but for some fields it may be other language French, etc.).On the other hand, an English-language publication published by a Czech publ international distribution and without a worldwide response cannot be considered world-cla Still important are publications that fall short in some criteria, for example, they were a less important journal or publishing house, have few responses, are less original or pre introductory or partial treatment of the problem. Publications are below average if they a publishing house or journal with only or without formal peer review, or in unreviewed proc The Committee also considers the structure of the list of publications in relation to the staff member's professional development prospects. In the case of the post of Assistant Pr evaluation committee will look at the structure of the publication list to see whether the realistically on track for the habilitation procedure. Other creative activities The employee may indicate other results of his/her creative activity. For clarity, the lis indicates the types of outputs monitored. For each category, a maximum of 5 of the most si outputs in the last 5 may be listed. This is not intended to be a complete list, but to hi significant outputs. Outputs and activities that have an international or significant research dimension or a b on the academic community (in the case of popularisation on society), or where the employe leading or significant role, are considered significant. For each output or activity, the shall specify the year and, where possible, provide a reference to the output/activity. • Active participation in a conference or workshop, invited lectures; curated exhibitions the creation of an exhibition), etc. • Project activities (basic and applied research projects, preparation of project applicat as principal investigator); • Organisation of workshops or conferences; • Expert activities (membership in scientific councils, membership in university, minister national or international evaluation panels or grant agencies, membership in working and bodies of the government and ministries, review of habilitation theses, review of articl for academic periodicals and publishing houses, membership in boards of publishing house etc.); • Popularization activities (CŽV, U3V, media appearances, journalism, popularization event public, public lectures, panel discussions, etc.); • Publication activity of a non-scientific type (popularization works, textbooks or other publications, translations of disciplinary significance, author exhibitions, etc.); • Research activities for the applied sphere (ministries, NGOs, companies). ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ B. Pedagogical activity ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Quality of teaching a.Quality teaching practices: we assume that teachers can reflect on the quality of their staff member will comment verbally on what he/she considers to be the quality of his/her what pedagogical methods he/she uses, or what problems he/she faces in teaching and how to solve them. It is considered a plus if he/she has innovated his/her courses or uses n pedagogical practices such as active learning, learning outcomes, etc., or if he/she has courses for the development of pedagogical competences. b.Evaluation of learners (especially in the SIS survey or in the application for evaluatio learners). The staff member being evaluated and the supervisor may comment verbally. Scope and volume of teaching The purpose of the quantitative indicators (see below) is to approximate the amount of tea Verbal comments, which can be attached to the indicators by both the staff member being as Head of Department, play an important role here. Indicators include: • Summary of all courses taught in ZS and LS in each year; in the case of shared teaching express the percentage of the employee being evaluated. • Average number of hours of teaching per week (both with and without shares according to teachers teaching one subject; in the case of multiple subjects taught jointly with othe committee relies on the comments of the staff member or supervisor [this indicator is on application evaluation]. • Number of attestations (average number of attestations awarded per semester; also counts attestations awarded in subjects without teaching - board exams, written theses, etc.) [ is only applied in the application evaluation]. • Thesis supervision (the number of theses in the last 5 years that have been (a) defended unfinished, (c) are currently being supervised, differentiated by level of study: bachel doctoral; the number and portfolio of supervised theses is assessed in relation to the t of the position and in relation to the average number in the department and the faculty • Writing of thesis referees (number of referees according to the level of study: bachelor doctoral, is evaluated in relation to the average number at the given department and fac Other Here the employee has the opportunity to indicate other teaching activities relevant to th aim is not to provide a complete list, but to highlight the most significant outputs. Thes for example: • Participation in the organisation of teaching (e.g. preparation and correction of tests examinations/state examinations, coordination of modules or major courses, participation conception of study programmes); • guaranteeing study programmes and courses; • Participation in the preparation and motivation of applicants (organisation of and parti events for applicants, participation in preparatory courses, etc.); • project activities for learning or mobility: preparation, management, participation; inc • working with students beyond the classroom (involving students in research, cooperating associations in their events, helping to organize student workshops, etc.). ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ C. Administrative and expert activities in academic bodies ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ These are mainly activities related to: a.operation of the relevant faculty department (head of department, deputy head, etc.); b.academic self-government at the faculty or university level (dean/rector, vice-dean/vice membership in faculty/university bodies - Academic Senate of FHS UK, Academic Senate of university committees and working groups, e.g. Disciplinary Committee, Research Ethics C c.scientific activities (editorial work in a journal or book series, administration of a g active membership in professional associations and their committees, etc.). ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ D. Soft skills and language skills ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ The evaluation also takes into account the language skills and soft skills of staff. Language skills The UK job catalogue lists language skills as a qualification for each position. Good know language, typically English, is a prerequisite for fulfilling an AP position. Self-assessm is an opportunity to reflect on the employee's weaker or excellent language skills and, wh language skills can be incorporated into an individual career development plan. Otherwise, leave the language skills item blank, i.e. do not assess. Soft skills Soft skills include the evaluation of work behaviour and conduct, in particular: communica workplace, social skills, responsibility, activity, flexibility, willingness to cooperate least, professionalism as a teacher and researcher - respectful behaviour towards students and attention to the ethical dimensions of scientific and pedagogical work. Self-assessmen indicate the strengths and weaknesses perceived by the employee and supervisor being evalu respect. The appraisal is an opportunity to reflect on problems or distinctive qualities i soft skills and to incorporate these into an individual career plan where appropriate. *========================================================================================= * II. Differences in AP, L and VP ratings *========================================================================================= The above breakdown is typical for the evaluation of male and female employees in AP posit Evaluation of lecturers The evaluation of lecturers emphasizes teaching activities, where we expect a greater amou but also the ability to reflect on the quality of teaching and self-development in this is competences needed for teaching (active work with didactic applications, more advanced wor Teams, etc.) may be important. Feedback from learners and the work of the lecturer is also Publication activity does not need to be reported. Administrative and expert activities may take the form of, for example, work related to th the relevant department of the faculty of the institute for both L1 and L2. In the case of the L2 pay grade, this may also include activities related to academic self-government at university level, or to scientific operations (editorial work in a domestic or foreign jou series, administration of a grant project, active membership in associations and their com Soft skills and language skills are assessed in the same way as for AP. Evaluation of researchers Researchers are not evaluated at all if they have a fixed-term contract and their employme be renewed for a fixed term and their performance is evaluated on an ongoing basis in rela performance of the projects in which they are involved (see Article 8(5) of Dean's Measure If an evaluation is carried out, it follows the same criteria as the evaluation of academi difference that only publications and soft skills (especially in relation to research, fie evaluated. Prague, 28 November 2024 doc. Věra Sokolová, M.A., Ph.D. Dean