Table 2

Scores per item on Dimension 1

1
R (%)
2
R (%)
3
R (%)
4
R (%)
5
R (%)
6
R (%)
7
R (%)
X (SD)Mdn
16. The evaluation criteria for accreditation and six-year periods determine the way I direct my academic activity377 (17.3)200 (9.2)157 (7.2)267 (12.2)318 (14.6)391 (17.9)473 (21.7)4.38 (2.159)5
17. The evaluation criteria for accreditation and six-year periods adequately assess my professional quality583 (26.7)371 (17.0)367 (16.8)346 (15.8)268 (12.3)167 (7.7)81 (3.7)3.08 (1.779)3
18. The evaluation criteria have a positive impact on the improvement of my academic activity687 (31.5)393 (18.0)348 (15.9)322 (14.8)230 (10.5)133 (6.1)70 (3.2)2.86 (1.747)3
19. The assessment criteria for accreditation and six-year periods favor cooperation between colleagues859 (39.3)407 (18.6)291 (13.3)282 (12.9)164 (7.5)134 (6.1)46 (2.1)2.57 (1.703)2
24. The teaching evaluation criteria favor my involvement in improving my students' learning563 (25.8)378 (17.3)283 (13.0)342 (15.7)252 (11.5)253 (11.6)112 (5.1)3.25 (1.904)3
25. The priority given to research merits in the evaluation process has a negative impact on my teaching activity417 (19.1)225 (10.3)150 (6.9)260 (11.9)253 (11.6)378 (17.3)500 (22.9)4.30 (2.232)5
29. The research evaluation criteria have a positive impact on the quality of my research activity495 (22.7)309 (14.2)289 (13.2)374 (17.1)320 (14.7)274 (12.6)122 (5.6)3.47 (1.900)3
30. The research evaluation criteria incentivize my academic output409 (18.7)231 (10.6)203 (9.3)302 (13.8)340 (15.6)419 (19.2)279 (12.8)4.06 (2.068)4
31. The research evaluation criteria contribute to the rigor of my research processes553 (25.3)319 (14.6)284 (13.0)296 (13.6)296 (13.6)271 (12.4)164 (7.5)3.43 (1.994)3

Source(s): Authors’ own creation

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal