About the results of teaching staff rating in the academic year 2014/2015

October 29th, 2015 a meeting of the Methodological Council "KPI", which was reviewed and approved the results of the rating of teaching staff (NPP) University in the 2014/2015 academic year.

Ranking was attended by 2,817 teaching staff, including 137 heads of departments, 325 professors and 1,068 associate professors, 520 senior teachers and 767 teachers.

Overall rating

At baseline values ​​of total average rating of 1000 points to a bid value of 2,225.88 (previous year - 1,935.25). Therefore, the average overall rating score increased by 291, or 15%. Approximately 47% of NPP with overall rating within 1000-2000 points (last year - 58%), but 14.4% the share of national parks, which have an overall rating bil¬she 2000 points. Less than 500 points with 135 PNP or 4.8% (last year - 183 PNP or 6.4%), most of them work on a part-share bid or academic year. The consolidated to full rate overall rating of 1000 points with less than 22 national parks. Head of the department proposed to provide educational and organizational management clarification of such cases.

Eight departments have a rating score more than the average value at the university. Two consecutive years in the top five of ITS, PBF, FMM and FBT, and among outsiders - FIOT, FMF and RTF. With respect to last year, improved its ranking FEL (9 positions) FSP (7), TEF (4), RTF and FMM (3) and FL (2). Much worse rating FPM (decrease of 9 positions) and IEE (-5), IFF (-4) and FTI, FAKS and ZF (-3).

Two consecutive years in the top ten of the department are: management (FMM), instrumentation (PBF), information and telecommunication networks (ITS) international economics (FMM) ecobiotechnology and bioenergy (FBT).

Four years in a row in the last ten for the overall rating are three departments: General Physics and Solid State Physics (FMF) General and Theoretical Physics (FMF) and General and Inorganic Chemistry (HTF). Two consecutive years in the last ten departments: System Design (IPSA)Applied Physics (FTI), information-measuring devices (FAKS). Overall rating for outsiders is also departments: Computer Science (FIOT)-in the ranking decreased by 18 positions; Software Computer Systems (FPM) - a drop in the ranking by 95 places; General and Experimental Physics (FMF) - reduction of 54 positions; theoretical foundations of Radioengineering (RTF) - 11 positions; and language preparation for foreigners (FL).

Rating of educational and methodological work

Average rating of NPP educational and methodological work is 1,258 points (last year - 1,163.8 points), representing 56.5% of the average total value rating and more than 2.3 times the base value of 450 points.

The average value rating of the NPP educational and methodical work  of the top five faculties / institutes are FMM, VPI, FPM, FL, FMF. The five outsiders - FAKS, FBT, MMI, IPSA, ZF.

In the past academic year, according to the Methodical Council of the University, the students conducted the evaluation of teaching quality. Through an electronic survey planned to spend the university campus twice per academic year, before the examinations. Average results of the survey were to be taken into account as a factor to reversible points for teaching work NPP. Unfortunately, for a number of reasons, this work was frustrated. Firstly, participated in the assessment of only 1,988 students (9.1%). Secondly, teaching assessed only NPP in 1581, or 56%. Thirdly, there are cases of one student teacher evaluation.

In view of the above, in the rating 2014/15 academic year NPP opinion of the students about the quality of teaching was impossible. To ensure active students participation in the assessment of needs to improve the teaching of "campus" and to take additional administrative and disciplinary measures.

Rating of scientific innovative-activities

Average rating of scientific innovation is 718.2 points (last year - 676.3 points), that increased by 10.6% and fourth year exceeds the base score (450 points). Basic value points for research and innovation NPP reached 44.7% (last year - 41.4%). More than 1,000 points of research and innovation work are 464 scientific-pedagogical workers, or 16.5% (last year - 381). Top rated from research and innovation to work with NPP 5-13 thousand points. For five years the average of the rating of scientific innovation has increased almost twice (by 81.6%).

Thus, we can conclude that the rating system is actually stimulates NPP scientific work of teachers.

However, part of NPP has the lack of ranking scientific innovation. Less than 100 points NPP with 393 (13.9%) (last year - 10.25%). Do not have scientific innovation achievements NPP 145 (5.15%) last year - 158 (5.53%), including 14 (4.3%) professors (last year - under 19, or 5 , 94%); 41 (3.84%) Associate (56 or 5.17%); 34 (6.54%) senior teachers (36, or 6.7%); 63 (8.31%) assistants and teachers (52 or 6.6%). At FTI and FIOT every fifth NPP has not scientific achievements. At FMF and IFF - every seventh-tenth NPP. For scientific and educational research university employee is unacceptable.

Department heads were proposed to provide educational and organizational management information on activities regarding NPP, ranking component of research and innovation activities are divided by the share rate is less than 100 points; take measures to enhance the research and innovation of the departments.

The average value ranking NPP on scientific and innovative work four consecutive years, retain leadership ITS, MMI and FBT. In the first ten positions remain PBF, IHF, IFF, FAKS and FMM. Four years in a row in the last three are FMF, FPM and FIOT. Visibly increased the level of research and innovation work: HTF (+6 places) and FAKS (+3) ,FBMI (+3), IPSA (+2) and TEF (+2). Deteriorated rating FTI (-4) ,IEE (-4), ZF (-4) and FEA (-3).

Two consecutive years in the top ten departments with the highest rating research and innovation are the department: instrumentation and control systems aircraft (FAKS), renewable energy (FEA), chemical, polymer i silicate Engineering (IHF), psychology and pedagogy (FSP) , instrumentation (PBF).

In this indicator outside chairs are: General and Experimental Physics (FMF) General and Theoretical Physics (FMF), differential equations (FMF), software and computer systems (FPM), automated data processing systems and management (FIOT). Needs  attention staying second year in the last tenth  for the scientific and innovative activity five departments: General and Theoretical Physics (FMF) General and Inorganic Chemistry (HTF) Mathematical Physics (FMF), General Physics and Solid State Physics (FMF) and Theoretical Mechanics (FAKS).

It should also be said that the processing of the rating sheets revealed a number of errors or false records: undefined post (136 cases); not determined the name of the department (3 cases); rating share is untrue; Latin names (5 cases), stated age NPP "3" or "5" years (6 cases); no recorded data on workload; didactic providing materials of classes (eg, presentations) submitted separately as methodological development; "development of curricula, programs and work programs" is noted for existing disciplines; the presence of duplicate records of work performed; written manuscripts, but not the published literature with the appropriate stamp and monographs that are not considered and not approved the scientific and technical council of the university; ignores the sponsors if certain works or not consistent distribution of contributions between co-authors.

The annual availability of these shortcomings testifies responsible for ranking NPP in the departments and heads of departments do not provide the accuracy of the information in the rating lists, do not enjoy access to ranking lists NPP department, rating and discussion lists NPP conducted formally.

At the end of the session Methodological council adopted a decision which, in particular, advised deputy director of institute / deans of the department teaching work to hold workshops on methodological guidance departments with the analysis results ranking PNP and take appropriate action. Academic councils of institutes / departments asked to compile and provide to the department methodological proposals on improvement of systems of departments ranking PNP and comprehensive definition of rating units. Directors of institutes, deans of faculties, heads of departments recommended to consider performance rating of teaching staff in planning staffing. Deputy director of institute / deans of faculties of educational work, head graduating department, curators of educational groups to ensure proper organization of student participation in the assessment of the quality of teaching in the 2015/2016 academic year.

 Inf. Methodical council NTUU"KPI"