OVERVIEW

MAIN OBJECTIVE

to obtain precise and verifiable information on the quality of research at the University through national and international benchmarking and to recommend the organizational and budgetary measures for the to achieve and maintain research excellence at the University

CONTENTS OF THE OVERVIEW

  • CONCEPT

  • CORE PRINCIPLES

  • PARTICIPANTS

  • SOURCES AND TOOLS

  • OUTCOMES

CONCEPT

CORE PRINCIPLES

Multiple-criteria evaluation

The evaluation is not a mere assessment of the results, but it seeks a complete assessment of the University’s research and other creative activities based on several tools.

Formative evaluation

The purpose of the evaluation is not only to "get a grade", but rather to get recommendations for further development of University’s research and creative activities.

Independent evaluation

After commencing of the evaluation cycle the University bodies do not interfere with the evaluation process until it is completed.

Field-centered evaluation

All the research outcomes will be evaluated within their corresponding scientific fields.

PARTICIPANTS

Research Evaluation Board

supreme independent body of evaluation

Mission

see full article about Research Evaluation Board

Expert Panels

four panels (Arts and humanities; Social sciences; Medical and health sciences; Natural sciences) dealing with the assessment of the quality of fields and research areas

Mission

see full article about Expert Panels

Reviewers

independent experts reviewing selected outputs

Mission

  • to provide to the Expert Panel the reviews of the selected research papers („outputs“) they were asked to review by the Panel

see full article about Reviewers

Support

Research Support Office of the Rectorate

IT Support

University Bodies

  • the evaluation is independent

  • after commencing of the evaluation cycle the University bodies do not interfere with the evaluation process until it is completed


see full article about University Bodies and Regulations

DATA SOURCES AND TOOLS

Data sources

    • data registered in the information system of the University

    • documents of the University and the units

    • external sources of information, in particular international bibliographic and citation databases (= Web of Science and Journal Citation Reports)

Evaluation tools

Indicators

    • statistical reports from data stored in the information system of the University


see full article about Indicators

Self-evaluation report of a unit

    • prepared by every evaluated unit of the University


see full article about Self-evaluation report

Bibliometric analysis

    • based on the bibliometric indicators of the quantity of research outputs and their quality assessed from the reputation of the journals in which the outputs were published and from their citation indexes (Web of Science, Journal Citation Reports)


see full article about Bibliometric analysis

Peer review of selected outputs

    • review of the selected outputs by independent internationally renowned experts (reviewers) with the objective of assessment of the relative randing of individual outcomes in comparison to the international and national standards of the field and the potential social or practical relevance of the outputs

see full article about Peer review

Site visits

  • only if needed

see full article about Site visit

OUTCOMES

Interim evaluation outcomes

Self-evaluation report of a unit

  • prepared by every evaluated unit of the University by January 2020


see full article about Self-evaluation report

Bibliometric reports

  • prepared by the Rectorat's bibliometric analysis team by January 2020

  • drafted in the English language in a standardised structure in the form of analytical reports and comments, if any, for individual fields and research areas and as a summary for individual units

see full article about Bibliometric analysis

Outcomes of peer review

  • compiled by the Expert Panels by March 2020

  • overviews of final grades of the individual research outputs structured by fields, research areas, and units and written in English


see full article about Peer review

Research area evaluation reports

see full article about Research area evaluation reports

Final assessment

Final Report

  • drafted by the Research Evaluation Board by October 2020 and subjected to the evaluated units for comments

  • finalised and handed over to the Rector by the Research Evaluation Board by December 2020 after considering the feedback from the evaluated units

  • describes and evaluates the quality of individual fields, research areas, and units and includes also recommendations for further development of the research at the University

see full article about Final Report