WUR is committed to discussing the current system of assessing scientists and has installed a committee to review the way scientists are recognised and rated. Have suggestions? Part 1: Yuling Bai, personal professor Plant Breeding.
'The big challenge is the high PhD numbers in the Tenure Track assessments. It is too high and this requirement may have a negative impact on quality. I think that we need quantitative criteria in Tenure Track as a basis, but I also think that we need to find a good balance between research, education and general tasks that are not included in credit calculation. When I started my tenure track, I was a study advisor for one day a week. Whereas study advisor is very important for education, this work was not reflected in credit calculation. So I had to convince the committee that my work as study advisor should be valued. I appreciate that my committee considered my 'non-credit' tasks. For a flexible assessment, committees should balance quantity and quality; and candidates should be able to demonstrate their 'extra quality' that cannot be reflected well by the quantitative criteria.'
/Public Release. This material from the originating organization/author(s) might be of the point-in-time nature, and edited for clarity, style and length. Mirage.News does not take institutional positions or sides, and all views, positions, and conclusions expressed herein are solely those of the author(s).View in full
here.
