EASTERN MEDITERRANEAN
UNIVERSITY
RESEARCHER INCENTIVE
PRINCIPLES
CHAPTER I
Aim, Scope, Basis and Definitions
VYK 08.08.2019
18-19/28-6 EK 5,
VYK 17.03.2022
21-22/15(a)-9
Aim
ARTICLE 1
The aim of these principles is to determine the
methods and fundamentals pertaining to the Researcher Incentive Award to be
given to Eastern Mediterranean University academic staff. The principles are
about the detailed qualities of activities to be taken as a basis in the
calculation of the researcher incentive scores in line with the nature of the
scientific fields as well as the corresponding points for activities and, methods
and basics for the calculation of the researcher incentive score.
Scope
ARTICLE 2
These principles
cover the regulations pertaining to Eastern Mediterranean University’s academic
staff’s scientific research projects, scientific meetings, publications, work,
received attributions and all other activity areas of similar type specified in
addition to the Researcher Incentive Principles. The principles also cover the
regulations for the supporting of other scientific research found appropriate
by the university organs, the specification of the Research Advisory Board’s
duties, responsibilities and operation areas within the scope of the present
incentive principles and, methods and regulations to be adhered by the academic
staff members wishing to apply for the Researcher Incentive Award.
Definitions and Abbreviations
ARTICLE 3
In the application of these principles;
a) RAB: Refers
to EMU Research Advisory Board,
b) Sub-activities:
Refer to sub-activities specified in the Activity and Score Table appearing in
the appendix section of these principles.
c) AEC: refers
to EMU Academic Evaluation Criteria,
d) Research:
On the condition that the research does not take place within the scope of a
project;
i.
it should have the written approval or consent of
the institution of higher education and national/international institutions and
organisations,
ii.
the researchers are expected to produce novel
information, provide solutions or conduct an analysis of technological
problems, and develop innovative products, work or design in line with the
scientific basics through undertaking duties at a university or a research
institution outside his/her own institution for a minimum period of three months.
iii.
The final report for the research should be
finalised after it has been found successful by the authorised organs of the
relevant institutions. Systematic work
not falling within the other activity types specified in these principles as
well as research approved in EMU Academic Evaluation Criteria regarding other
matters not falling within the scope of the Research Advisory Board’s
Scientific Research Support Principles as well as other regulations.
e) Research
Support Principles: refer to EMU Research Support Principles applied by the
Research Advisory Board.
f) Citation:
refers to attributions to the academic staff member’s publications which are
not authored by the said academic staff member.
g) Presentation:
As also described in the Researcher Incentive Principles Activity and Score
Table, presentations delivered and published in national and international
meetings which have a scientific board (proceedings book, abstract book, web
site or in CD or DVD format),
h) Unit
Researcher Incentive Application and Evaluation Commission: Refers to the
Commission which conducts a preliminary evaluation of the academic staff
member’s incentive files at Faculties or Schools under the title of
Faculty/School Researcher Incentive Application and Evaluation Commission or
Schools under the title of School of ….. Researcher Incentive Application and
Evaluation Commission.
i) Area
indexes: Indexes recognised at EMU Academic Evaluation Criteria,
j) Activity:
Activity refers to finalised national or international projects which have the
quality of contributing to science, technology and arts, research, publication,
design, exhibition, patent, citations from one’s work, presentations delivered
at international meetings which have a scientific board, received academic
awards and scientific/service-related activity areas which are specified in
these principles, all of which are expected to have taken place during the
former year for each calendar year.
k) Refereed
Journal: Refers to a refereed journal published at least once a year for the
past three years.
l) Patent: Refers
to patents registered by national or international organisations,
m) Project: Refers
to projects carried out within the scope of those defined by EMU Research
Advisory Board as well as those which have undergone scientific evaluation and
received budgetary support following their approval by the national and
international institutions and those carried out in line with scientific
principles and serving for the purpose of the production of new information and
scientific interpretation or provision of solutions to technological problems.
For the recognition of the aforesaid work as a project, the final report should
be found successful by the authorised bodies.
n) Exhibition:
Refers to all audio and visual exhibitions, biennales, shows, mini-concerts,
concerts, festivals and performances carried out by the academic staff member’s
activity field which have artistic or scientific qualities.
o) Calendar
Year: Refers to the period between 1 January and 31 December,
p) Design: Refers
to the preliminary draft, design and finalised version of a structure or a
technical/industrial product within the academic activity field of the relevant
academic staff member.
q) Incentive
Award: Refers to in-cash and in-kind incentive support to be determined by the
Eastern Mediterranean University Rector’s Office and the authorised boards.
r) Award: Excluding
those granted via the relevant institutions of EMU within the scope of EMU’s
rules, regulations and by-laws, it refers to academic and arts-related awards
at national or international levels granted by professional organisations and
state or public institutions in the relevant field upon the evaluation of a
board which has members from the area of the academic staff member in return
for activities which took place in the relevant academic area
s) National
Publishing House: A publishing house which has been operating regularly at the
national level (TRNC and Turkey) for a minimum period of five years and
published at least twenty books in the same field belonging to different
writers.
t) International
Publishing House: A publishing house operating regularly at the international
level for a minimum period of five years and published a minimum of twenty
books in the same field belonging to different authors,
u) Publication:
Excluding thesis work, refers to the authoring of research book, coursebook,
chapter in a book, encyclopedia section, and article and editorship, membership
in an editorial board, membership in a publication board, journal refereeing,
translation and translation editorship, and performance-based audio and/or
visual recording.
In the clarification of doubts regarding the
definitions present in the current principles, EMU Research Support Principles
are taken into consideration. If a need for the clarification of issues in the
Research Support Principles arises, EMU Academic Evaluation Criteria will be
taken into consideration.
CHAPTER TWO
General Principles
Research Advisory Board
ARTICLE 4
(1) In
addition to the duties specified in EMU Research Support Principles, the
Research Advisory Board has the responsibility of fulfilling the duties and
responsibilities specified in these principles. During the fulfillment of
duties specified in EMU Researcher Incentive Principles, the Research Advisory
Board has the full authority in the preparation of incentive principles, their
calculation and application of the approved incentive principles.
(2) The
Research Advisory Board is responsible for the specification and announcement of
the methods and principles pertaining to these principles prior to the start of
applications, as well as the preparation and implementation of the researcher
incentive application calendar and finalisation of the process which the award
will be granted. (Ref.: VYK
17.03.2022 21-22/15(a)-9)
(3) The
Research Advisory Board is the ultimate decision making body in clarifying
doubts and resolving disputes that may arise during the application of
principles regarding the documentation of the activities and their classification
within the activity types. In the clarification of doubts and resolution of
disputes, the Research Advisory Board acts in
accordance with EMU Research Support Principles and EMU Academic
Evaluation Criteria and takes into consideration the special requirements of
each field of science as well as relevant work and ensures that their decision
is non-biased, fair and in compliance with the principles.
Unit Researcher Incentive Application and
Evaluation Commission
ARTICLE 5
(1)
With the purpose of
fulfilling duties assigned by these principles and conducting a preliminary
evaluation of the incentive applications, a Unit Researcher Incentive
Application and Evaluation Commission made up of minimum three and maximum five
members is formed under each Faculty or School upon the decision of the
Faculty/School Board.
(2)
In the event of the Faculty or School Boards not
forming a Faculty/School Researcher Incentive Application and Evaluation
Commission, in accordance with Article 10(3) of the Scientific
Research Support Principles, the Project Evaluation Group appointed within the
scope of each Faculty and/or Department’s Type C Scientific Research Project
(BAP-C) Application Principles may be appointed for the aforesaid purpose with
the approval of the Faculty or School Board.
(3)
In the commission, the most senior member in terms
of title and/or work is appointed as the Chair. Commission members are selected by the
Faculty/School Board amongst the most senior academic staff members in terms of
title and different departments operating under the Faculty/School. While
choosing the commission members, the Faculty/School takes special attention in
making balanced choices amongst different departments operating under them. In
the event of not having sufficient numbers of adequate academic staff members
within the Faculty/School, members may be chosen amongst academic staff members
whose field of expertise is closely linked to those specified. The service
period for the commission members is two years. Members who have reached the
end of the service period may be re-elected. In the event of a member leaving
the commission due to various causes, a new member who will provide services
during the remaining service period of the former member is elected through the
same method.
(4)
In the event of not forming a Faculty/School
Researcher Incentive Application and Evaluation Commission, upon the
Faculty/School Board’s decision, Project Evaluation Groups (PEG) may undertake
relevant duties within the same scope.
(5)
The commission convenes with absolute majority of
the number of members including the chair. Decisions are taken with absolute
majority. In the event of a tie vote, decisions are taken in line with the vote
of the commission chair.
(6)
The commission has the authority to clarify doubts
that may emerge during the documentation of activities and their classification
within the activity types and may transfer the matter of dispute or uncertainty
to the Research Advisory Board for the final decision.
Researcher Incentive Application and Evaluation
Process
ARTICLE 6
(1) Academic staff members are expected to apply to the
relevant Unit Researcher Incentive Application and Evaluation Commission. The
Commission conducts a preliminary evaluation of the suitability of applications.
(2) Within
scope of the specified application calendar, academic staff members submit
their incentive applications and a file containing samples, proof and documents
for academic activities to the relevant Unit Researcher Incentive Application
and Evaluation Commission in line with the specified methods and within the
specified period.
(3) If deemed
necessary, the Unit Researcher Incentive Application and Evaluation Commission
may demand additional information, clarification and documents from the applicants
at all stages of the evaluation of academic activities. Applicants
are required to fulfill the said demands within 10 working days. In the event
of the failure of submission of missing documents or information, and not
meeting the demands for additional information and documents, the Commission
may reject the application.
(4) The Unit
Researcher Incentive Application and Evaluation Commission primarily determines
whether the activities of the applicant are suitable for the evaluation of the
commission. Applications not found suitable are transferred for the evaluation
of the Research Advisory Board with justifications. The Research Advisory Board
is the ultimate decision making body in the relevant applications.
(5) The Unit
Researcher Incentive Application and Evaluation Commission conducts an
assessment of the applications and submits a signed copy of the decisions
taken, the relevant evaluation report on the applications and a score table to
the Research Advisory Board in compliance with the announced calendar. The
aforesaid documents should also bear the approval of the department chair in
departments operating under the Rector’s Office, deans in faculties and
directors in other units.
(6) Written
justification/explanation for the academic activities which have been rejected
in the evaluation report prepared by the Unit Researcher Incentive Application
and Evaluation Commission or undergone a point value change has to be
provided.
(7) The
Research Advisory Board is responsible for examining the applications sent by
the Unit Researcher Incentive Application and Evaluation Commission as well as
the basis for the evaluation decisions taken by the commissions. In situations
of necessity, the applicants may be asked to submit additional documents and
information and/or changes may be applied on decisions submitted by the
relevant units. The aforesaid demands should be catered for within 5 working
days by the relevant academic staff applicant. In the event of the failure of
submission of missing documents or information, or not meeting the demands for
additional information and documents, the Research Advisory Board determines
whether or not the required information is mandatory for the presentation of
the incentive award and, if deemed necessary, rejects the incentive application
with justifications.
(8) The Board
signs the meeting resolutions, the evaluation report for applications, and the
attached score table and inform the relevant researchers in writing or through
electronic environment of the decisions taken. Written justification for the
academic activities which have been rejected in the evaluation report prepared
by the Research Advisory Board or undergone a point value change has to be
provided.
(9) Appeals
against the decisions of the Research Advisory Board may be submitted to the
said board within 5 working days following the announcement of the relevant
decision of the board. The Commission finalises the decisions within 15 working
days following the deadline for the application period for appeals. Decisions of
the Research Advisory Board are final.
Evaluation of the Researcher Incentive Activity
Areas
ARTICLE 7
(1)
In the evaluation
of the award, date of the receival of the award, in the evaluation of the
projects and research, date of the finalisation of the projects and research,
in the evaluation of designs, date of the finalisation of the design, in the
evaluation of patents, date of the patent registry, and in the evaluation of
exhibitions, the launch day of the exhibition are taken as a basis.
(2)
In the evaluation of editorship in refereed
journals, points belonging to the current year are taken into consideration.
For each figure, a separate scoring takes place. Points for delayed publications
or for publications which cannot be documented are not taken into
consideration.
(3)
For the scoring of international presentations, the
meeting/symposium/congress scientific board should be formed of minimum 5
international academicians from abroad, regardless of the place of the meeting
(local or international).
(4)
For the scoring of national presentations, the
meeting/symposium/congress scientific board should be formed of minimum 5
academicians, regardless of the place of the meeting/congress/symposium.
(5)
For an exhibition to be evaluated as international,
its international quality should be confirmed by the relevant department’s
board of science or arts.
(6)
Citations from other publications of academic staff
members are included into calculations even though they do not appear in
academic classifications and activities.
(7)
International presentations related to the topic of
the project may be delivered within the same year the project is carried out.
The presentation may be converted to an article or a book and, citations and
awards may be received from such activities. Situations as such may be
re-scored in separate or different academic activity fields.
(8)
Multiple awards may be received from the same
activity. In situations as such, each award is included in the calculations
separately.
(9)
In the scoring of the re-published books or book
chapters, repeated exhibitions, concerts and demonstrations taking place within
the same year, 50% of the activity score assigned within the same year of
evaluation is applied.
(10) Formation
of research infrastructure, entrepreneurship, projects targeted towards
supporting the research culture of researchers and students, and projects
working towards civic involvement and social responsibility activities fall
outside the scope of the incentive award.
For each carried out project, the award is targeted towards the
provision of complementary or supportive budgetary support from different
institutions or organisations. No repeated scoring for work appearing as an
extension/part of the same project is held.
(11) Activities
falling within the scope of the journals indexed by those specified in the
attached Activity and Score Table of these principles are included in the score
calculation of researchers in all areas of science.
(12) Doubts
that may emerge during the incentive evaluation of all scientific activities
specified in the attached Activity and Score Table of these principles are
clarified with a consideration of EMU Academic Evaluation Criteria and,
principles and applications of EMU Academic Evaluation Board. EMU Research
Advisory Board is the authorised body in taking decisions regarding the said
issues.
(13) Those
applicants who have been recruited at EMU as an academic staff member and, at
the same time, who have a scientific publication/work or service
published/carried out bearing the title of EMU may benefit from the researcher
incentive award.
(14) Upon the approval
of EMU Rector’s Office, the University Executive Board and Senate, the Activity
and Score Table appearing in the Researcher Incentive Principles and the
relevant attachments may be used in the performance evaluation of the academic
staff members. Decisions regarding this issue is subject to the approval of the
related organs of EMU.
Calculation
of the Researcher Incentive Point
ARTICLE 8
(1)
The Researcher Incentive Award refers to the real
or cash support specified in line with the rates/proportions determined by
these principles by EMU Rector’s Office and the relevant Boards.
(2)
Researcher Incentive Score is calculated as follows
and in line with the attached Activity and Score Table:
a)
Primarily, the score for each academic activity
type is obtained. The calculation is carried
out through the addition of rates obtained by the academic staff member from
the sub-activities of each activity type and their multiplication by 10, 20 or
30 points, each of which are specified for each academic activity type. [Academic
activity type score = addition of sub-activity rates x point specified for the
type of activity]
b)
The main researcher’s incentive score for the
Researcher Incentive Award is calculated through the addition of points
obtained from each academic activity type.
(3)
The activity score obtained by the academic staff
member from each activity type may not exceed 10, 20 or 30 points specified for
each academic activity. Similarly, the researcher incentive score (total
activity score) may not exceed 100 points.
(4)
The following principles are applied in the
specification of score incentive rates for publication and presentation
activities with more than one academic staff member:
a) For the
first author, 100%,
b)
100% for the corresponding author and senior author
(the final name in the article who has at least 10 international publications
in the field of publication) and the name delivering the presentation, regardless of the order of authors.
c) For the
second author, 90%,
ç) For the third author, 80%,
d) For the
fourth author, 70%,
e) For the
fifth and further authors, 50% is taken into consideration.
(5) In the
determination of the incentive score for the project activities in which more
than one academic staff member has been involved:
a) For the
project coordinator, 100%,
b) For the
researcher or advisor academic staff member, 80%,
c) For the
researcher or advisor; senior instructor, research assistant, instructor, and
expert, 70% is taken into consideration.
(6)
In the scoring of the citation activity type,
number of persons is not taken into consideration. Separate scores are
calculated for each researcher. Attributions to the same publication appearing
in different chapters/sections of a book or article are considered as one
citation only. However, in books which have different authors for each chapter,
separate score evaluation for each citation in different chapters takes place.
(7)
For activities which lack a special sharing rate or
the ranking/rating of authors, the ratio of “rate/number of authors” is taken
into consideration. However, group activities such as exhibitions are evaluated
out of full points regardless of the number of the persons.
(8)
In the calculation of the Researcher Incentive
Award, doubts regarding the specification of activities to be included in the
calculations are clarified through the decision of the Research Advisory Board
in line with the Research Support Principles and Academic Evaluation Criteria.
Whilst taking decisions regarding this item, the Research Advisory Board takes
into consideration the qualities of the fields of science as well as the principles,
applications and decisions of EMU Academic Evaluation Commission.
Other
Provisions
ARTICLE 9
(1)
The Research Advisory Board
evaluates applications submitted in areas other than the activity areas
specified in these Principles within the scope of Article 8(8) of these
principles and determines whether or not they are suitable academic activities
for the researcher incentive support.
(2)
To earn the right to apply for the Researcher
Incentive Award, the researcher should possess minimum sixty (60) incentive
points obtained from minimum three (3) activity areas. (Ref.: VYK 17.03.2022 21-22/15(a)-9)
(3)
Academic staff members who have terminated their
employment in EMU are not entitled to apply for the researcher incentive award.
(4)
Following the presentation of the award, the
Rector’s Office is informed about the applications detected to contain false
information upon the decision of the Research Advisory Board. The Rector’s
Office may initiate relevant procedures regarding the cancellation of the award
or return of the payments issued.
CHAPTER 3
Final Provisions
Execution
ARTICLE 10
These
principles take effect following the date of their approval by the Eastern
Mediterranean University Board of Trustees.
Executive
Power
ARTICLE
11
These
principles are executed by the Eastern Mediterranean University Rector’s Office.
RESEARCH
INCENTIVE PRINCIPLES ACTIVITY AND SCORE BOARD
|
ACTIVITY TYPE |
SUB-ACTIVITY |
DETAILS |
RATIO (%) |
|
|
(1) PROJECT (30 POINTS) |
Internationally funded finalized project |
Project funded by World Bank, European Union and Council of Europe
(Only for projects with R&D (Research and Development) characteristics) |
100 |
|
|
Project funded by other international private or public institutions
(Only for projects with R&D characteristics) |
80 |
|||
|
Nationally funded finalized project |
Project funded by TÜBA (Turkish Academy of Sciences) and TÜBÝTAK
(Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey) |
75 |
||
|
Project funded by Ministry (Only for projects with R&D
characteristics) |
75 |
|||
|
Industrial Theses Support Program (SAN- TEZ) project |
75 |
|||
|
Projects funded by other public institutions except from Higher
Education Institutions (Only for projects with R&D characteristics) |
35 |
|||
|
Scientific Research Project funded by Higher Education Institutions
(Only for projects with R&D characteristics) |
35 |
|||
|
Private Institutions (R&D, innovation and unique design projects) |
20 |
|||
|
(2) PUBLICATION (30 POINTS) |
Scientific book (exempt the Thesis) |
Scientific book published internationally in the field of expertise |
100 |
|
|
Scientific book published nationally in the field of expertise |
60 |
|||
|
Course book |
Course book published internationally in the field of expertise |
70 |
||
|
Course book published nationally in the field of expertise |
40 |
|||
|
Chapter in a book |
A chapter in a book published internationally in the field of
expertise |
40 |
||
|
A chapter in a book published nationally in the field of expertise |
20 |
|||
|
Translation of a book |
Complete translation of a book in the field of expertise |
30 |
||
|
Chapter(s) translation of a book in the field of expertise |
15 |
|||
|
Section in an encyclopedia |
Section in an encyclopedia published internationally in the field of
expertise |
10 |
||
|
Section in an encyclopedia published nationally in the field of
expertise |
6 |
|||
|
Authentic / compiled article |
Complete article published in journals within the scope of SSCI,
SCI-Exp, AHCI |
40 |
||
|
Complete article published in journals within the scope of ESCI |
35 |
|||
|
Complete article published in area index journals excluding SSCI,
SCI-Exp, AHCI, ESCI |
30 |
|||
|
Complete article published in other national or international
peer-reviewed journals |
20 |
|||
|
Other (Technical note, brief article, comment, case report, letter to
editor, summary, book critique, research note) |
Article published in journals within the scope of SSCI, SCI-Exp, AHCI |
10 |
||
|
Article published in journals within the scope of ESCI |
8 |
|||
|
Article published in area index journals excluding SSCI, SCI-Exp,
AHCI, ESCI |
6 |
|||
|
Internationally broadcasted, performance-based audio and/or video
recording |
Authentic individual recording |
40 |
||
|
Integrated recording |
20 |
|||
|
Nationally broadcasted, performance-based audio and/or video recording |
Authentic individual recording |
20 |
||
|
Integrated recording |
5 |
|||
|
(3) EDITORSHIP / REFEREEING
(10 POINTS) |
Book editorship |
Book editorship in internationally published book in the field of
expertise |
60 |
|
|
Book editorship in nationally published book in the field of expertise |
30 |
|||
|
Proceedings editorship |
Editorship in proceedings book of international congress or symposium |
30 |
||
|
Editorship in proceedings book of national congress or symposium |
15 |
|||
|
Journal editorship |
Editorship in journals within the scope of SSCI, SCI-Exp, AHCI |
30 |
||
|
Editorship in area index journals excluding SSCI, SCI-Exp, AHCI, ESCI |
10 |
|||
|
Editorship in journals within the scope of ESCI |
15 |
|||
|
Refereeing |
Refereeing in journals within the scope of SSCI, SCI-Exp, AHCI |
5 |
||
|
Refereeing in journals within the scope of ESCI |
3 |
|||
|
Refereeing in area index journals excluding SSCI, SCI-Exp, AHCI, ESCI |
3 |
|||
|
Refereeing in other national or international peer-reviewed journals |
2 |
|||
|
(4) DESIGN (30 POINTS) |
Artistic design (building, environment, artefact, site, object, media
work) |
Applied in public institutions and private law legal entities |
30 |
|
|
Awards in project competitions (first 3 places) |
National |
15 |
||
|
International |
30 |
|||
|
Beneficial artifact/object |
TSE/TPE certified (TSE- Turkish Standards Institution, TPE- Turkish
Patent and Trademark Office) |
30 |
||
|
(5) EXHIBITION (30 POINTS) |
Authentic individual event |
International |
60 |
|
|
National |
30 |
|||
|
Integrated event |
International invitational/competitive event |
15 |
||
|
National invitational/competitive event |
10 |
|||
|
(6) PATENT (30 poýnts) |
Internationally registered patent in the field of expertise |
100 |
||
|
Nationally registered patent in the field of expertise |
60 |
|||
|
(7)
ATTRIBUTION (20 POINTS) |
For each attribution from different publications of the academic staff
member listed in the references section of international books in which the
academic staff member is not among the writers of the books in question |
8 |
||
|
For each attribution from different publications of the academic staff
member listed in the references section of national books in which the
academic staff member is not among the writers of the books in question |
2 |
|||
|
For each attribution from different works of the academic staff member
listed in the references section of journals covered by SSCI, SCI-Exp, AHCI
in which the academic staff member is not among the writers of the journals
in question |
4 |
|||
|
For each attribution from different works of the academic staff member
listed in the references section of international journals except SSCI,
SCI-Exp, AHCI in which the academic staff member is not among the writers of
the journals in question |
2 |
|||
|
For each attribution from different publications of the academic staff
member listed in the references section of journals covered by ESCI in which
the academic staff member is not among the writers of the journals in
question |
2 |
|||
|
For each attribution from different journals of the academic staff
member listed in the references section of national peer-reviewed journals in
which the academic staff member is not among the writers of the journals in
question |
2 |
|||
|
Performing a work of the composer in an international concert where
the composer does not takes part in |
5 |
|||
|
Attribution from scientific publications in court decision |
8 |
|||
|
(8)
presentatýon (30 poýnts) |
Attending international congresses and symposiums as a keynote speaker |
50 |
||
|
Presentation in international congresses and symposiums as a guest
speaker |
40 |
|||
|
Oral presentation of a full text publication in international
congresses and symposiums |
30 |
|||
|
Presentation of a published poster in international congresses and
symposiums |
10 |
|||
|
Oral presentation of a published abstract in international congresses
and symposiums |
10 |
|||
|
Attending national congresses and symposiums as a keynote speaker |
40 |
|||
|
Presentation in national congresses and symposiums as a guest speaker |
30 |
|||
|
Oral presentation of a full text publication in national congresses
and symposiums |
20 |
|||
|
Presentation of a published poster in national congresses and
symposiums |
5 |
|||
|
Oral presentation of a published abstract in national congresses and
symposiums |
5 |
|||
|
(9)
AWARD (30 POINTS) (EXCEPT
STUDY/projeCT/ PUBLICATION INCENTIVE/PARTICIPATION- ACHIEVEMENT CERTIFICATE
ve PLAQUE/SCHOLARSHIP/CERTIFICATE OF HONOUR /CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE) |
Scientific award granted by TÜBA or TÜBÝTAK |
100 |
||
|
Scientific award granted by institution or organizations abroad in the
field of expertise |
80 |
|||
|
Scientific award granted by domestic state institutions and
organizations |
40 |
|||
|
Award granted by science and/or artistic board of events such as
international congress, assembly, symposium, conference and festival
(academic staff member who is issued on behalf can apply) |
30 |
|||
|
Award granted by science and/or artistic board of events such as
national congress, assembly, symposium, conference and festival (academic
staff member who is issued on behalf can apply) |
15 |
|||
|
Award granted by private institutions and organizations in the field
of expertise |
10 |
|||
|
(10) POST-GRADUATE THESIS
OR PROJECT Coordýnator (10 POINTS) |
Completed PhD thesis |
50 |
||
|
Completed post-graduate thesis |
25 |
|||
|
Completed post-graduate project |
10 |
|||
|
(11) PROVIDING SERVING TO
EMU AND THE PUBLIC (10 POINTS) |
Serving EMU (as specified in ADEK criteria, except coordinator /
membership / presidency services funded with executive compensation) |
Launching and Development Activities: assigning a duty in the
launching of a new unit within EMU |
50 |
|
|
In-service training and/or seminar activities organized for university
staff |
10 |
|||
|
Design and planning created for university |
50 |
|||
|
Establishing a laboratory: establishing a course or research lab |
20 |
|||
|
Serving the public (as specified in ADEK criteria) |
Educational Activities: in-service training activities to be provided
to staff working within the body of government-owned units and/or
non-governmental organizations; preparations of exams for promotion,
selection, placement and competition, and/or evaluation activities |
15 |
||
|
Informing: Activities published/broadcasted in printed and/or visual
media with the aim of informing the public in the field of expertise |
5 |
|||
|
Expert’s report/service: Each expert’s report/service prepared in the
field of expertise on the requested matters coming from organizations |
20 |
|||
|
Mentoring relevant institutions or organizations in the field of
expertise |
15 |
|||
|
Board membership in relevant institutions or organizations in the
field of expertise |
15 |
|||