Document Type : Original Article
Authors
1 M.Sc student, Department of Medical Education, School of Medicine, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran
2 Nursing and Midwifery Care Research Center, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran
3 Department of Medical Education, School of Medicine, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran
4 Department of Medical Surgical Nursing, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran
5 Eye Research Center, Khatam-al-Anbia Hospital, Faculty of Medicine, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran
6 Departments of Medical Education, School of Medicine, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran
7 Transplant Center, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran
Abstract
Keywords
Introduction
To improve every society, especially developing societies, it is necessary to heed the human resources of educational organizations. Educational organizations play a major role in meeting the current and future needs of any society by carrying out missions including education, research, and professional services (1).
The progress and development of countries are results of the unremitting efforts by scientists, scholars, and those in charge of education. However, the education systems have a particular place considering that they can provide the specialized workforce needed for the growth and excellence of human societies. Higher education in the Islamic Republic of Iran is not only responsible for equipping the country's workface with the power of science, technology, education, and training of researchers and scholars, but providing a disciplined and morally qualified workforce is important. Also, attracting, maintaining, motivating, and promoting the professional life of faculty members considering the exceptional attention saved for the significance of spiritual issues are among the circumstances influencing the efficacy and effectiveness of higher education. Attracting human resources requires awareness and recognition of aptitudes, interests, skills, and attention to material and spiritual needs such as, strengthening social status, education, and growth, conceiving conventional opportunities for progress and development along with laying the foundations for the excellence of faculty members concerned with education (2).
The higher education system as a target phenomenon possesses two dimensions, namely quantitative and qualitative, whose steady and harmonious growth must be regarded in both quantitative and qualitative dimensions, and their respective progress provided in parallel. Faculty members are among the foremost and major factors in the structure of higher education in the country and their decline in both quantitative and qualitative aspects has a direct impact on the performance of the higher education system. Considering the decisive status and role of higher education in the economic, social, and cultural advancement of the country, higher education department trains the specialized workforce required by different departments accordingly. Thus, strengthening and developing this department, especially faculty members as the soul and the lifeblood of higher education, acts as the main foundation for development of other sectors. Consequently, the quality of a higher education institution depends on the quality and scientific expertise of the faculty members. However, a higher education institution is absurd to exist or prosper without maintaining faculty members equipped with science, knowledge, professional competence, commitment, aptitude, and real motivation that can provide quality education and research (3).
The value of improving the quality of all aspects concerning higher education is more than ever the mission of universities and the higher education system in the comprehensive growth and development of the country by cultivating specialized human resources needed by different parts of society, promoting knowledge, and research culture. Moreover, it is necessary to entice and evaluate scientific faculty members as the leading factors of development regarding the scientific progress of the country, the assemblage of a comprehensive scientific map, the unique status, the distinctive role of universities in promoting science, and elevating the quality of education and research. Parallel with these actions, special attention should be heeded to the scientific progress of the university, and executing reforms and revisions in the faculty member recruitment indicators is a notable part of this reform process (4).
Currently, the resolutions of the Supreme Council of the Cultural Revolution regarding the proper provision of faculty members required by the higher education system are available to the public with its latest amendments in the form of a set of rules and regulations overseeing the recruitment of faculty members for universities and higher education institutions. This law emphasizes on the recruitment and selection of the most competent professors in both scientific and general aptitude aspects (expertise and commitment), and has strived to establish indicators and tools in the executive regulations to achieve this noble end. The Supreme Board and the Central Board of Admissions have repeatedly demanded from the higher education organizations to cooperate so that they can improve and modify the existing methods and means for assessing these capabilities for applicants’ recruitment. The ultimate purpose of these laws is to select the most qualified and capable applicant(s) in scientific and general aptitude aspects (expertise and commitment). Yet, this is not an easy task to tackle with, and experts and authorities are required to get involved in this matter. In this study, there was an endeavor to refer to the university elites and benefactors to access and collect their views in a conventional and methodical manner, and to reflect practical suggestions to the relevant authorities to amend the recruitment regulations.
In the early 2010s, in response to criticisms directed towards the existing recruitment mechanisms, the Supreme Council of the Cultural Revolution reconsidered the issue of faculty recruitment, adopted, and announced new criteria implemented since 2008 and now they have shaped the process of attracting the country's faculty (5). The form comprising the academic aptitude scores of the volunteer faculty member (the main object in this study) is in accordance with the regulations of admission and has 20 components that include the following criteria.
1. Ability to teach and prepare lesson plans, 20 points
2. Teaching experiences and credentials, 5 points
3. Publishing articles in scientific, research, extension, and other journals licensed and approved by the Commission of Medical Sciences Journals, 15 points
4. Presenting papers in national and international congresses, 5 points
5. Authoring and translating books in the field of expertise, 15 points
6. Executor or collaborator in research projects, 10 points
7. Association with the editorial board or arbitration in a prestigious scientific journal or congressional faculty, 5 points
8. Association with the National Elites Foundation or National Organization for Development of Exceptional Talents, 10 points
9. Awarding recipients of prestigious scientific festivals or Olympiads (scientific honors such as national top students, national festivals, first to third ranks of entrance exam in the field and valedictorian graduates of master's and Ph.D. programs, and first, second, and third ranks of specialized exams and subspecialty exams), 15 points
10. Ability to use new electronic technologies and databases, 5 points
11. Fluency in common languages in scientific societies (Arabic, English, French, German, etc.), 10 points
12. GPA score of bachelor's, masters and Ph.D. programs along with master's and Ph.D. dissertation score, 5 points
13. The ranking quality of the university where the candidate has completed the last degree in, 5 points
14. The ranking quality of the university where the candidate has completed the previous programs, 5 points
15. Technology activities, 12 points
16. Launching educational activities, 5 points
17. Professional credential background as a faculty member, 4 points
18. Scientific certificates/diplomas in addition to the degree and participation in specialized workshops, 10 points
19. Designing education packages, 2 points
20. Specialized technical/clinical skills in a specific field, 20 points
The total score of this form is equal to 183 points.
The necessity to support the higher education sector requires the increasing of the attractions associated with this area to entice specialized staff, especially qualified and rare workforce. As a result, this article aims to examine the status of faculty recruitment indicators, so the present researchers attempted to survey the twenty components of the faculty recruitment scoring form.
Methods
This research was a descriptive survey study conducted cross-sectionally. For this purpose, according to the regulations for recruiting faculty members and with the help of stakeholders' opinions and experiences in the field of recruitment, the status of the components of the academic ability score form of the volunteer faculty member was reviewed. Eventually, these people changed, developed, and scored the components.
In this research, the data were qualitative and were selected using purposive sampling method. Instead of getting information from easily accessible people, it may sometimes be necessary to get information from certain people or groups, that is, certain types of people who can provide the information we want; because they are the only people who can provide such information or meet some of the criteria set by the researcher. This type of sampling plan is called targeted sampling: the samples will be selected in such a way that they can represent the desired whole (6). Therefore, the statistical population of this study included experts in faculty recruitment as the Vice-Chancellor of the University, the management of the Center for the Study and Development of Medical Education, heads of faculties, and vice-chancellors and managers of departments of Mashhad University of Medical Sciences.
The study was conducted through focus group meetings and interviews. Using a focus group to gather information is a valuable method for qualitative researchers. This method has increasingly opened its place in qualitative research. A focus group is a series of group discussions planned to gain a group of individuals' perceptions of a particular topic in a permissible and non-threatening way and is properly organized and led. The main characteristic that distinguishes the focus group is the knowledge and information created through the interaction between the participants. The open form of the focus group questions provides extensive, in-depth, and rich information in the participants' own words.
Data were collected in the sessions based on the form related to the academic ability scores of the volunteer members of the faculty of universities and higher education centers of the country according to the regulations of the formation of the high faculty recruitment of faculty members of universities and higher education centers. This form was approved following the approvals of the 608th and 623rd meetings dated 10/07/2007 and 29/04/2008 of the Supreme Council of the Cultural Revolution in the Ministry, and since that date, it has always been used in the process of recruiting faculty members of universities. The recruitment of university faculty members based on this form is done throughout the country (7).
After the approval of the research plan by Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, the date of the focus group meetings in each faculty was determined separately. Participants were contacted before attending the meeting to attend. In each session, verbal consent was also obtained to participate in the study.
To conduct the focus group interview, the present researchers selected a total of 71 people to participat in the study including 14 people from the basic sciences groups of the medical school, 13 people from the clinical science groups of the medical school, 13 people from the school of pharmacy, 9 people from the dental school, 8 people from the School of Paramedicine, 9 people from the School of Nursing and Midwifery, and 5 people from the School of Traditional and Complementary Medicine and Health.
In the meetings of each faculty, the researcher provided the necessary explanations about the purpose and implementing the research project. Before the focus group, the researchers justified the professors so that they could cooperate more confidently in the sessions. In the next step, according to the form that was available to all participants, it proceeded from component to component, using a focus group having the integrated benefits of interviewing and observing people's interactions in the form of a group interview. Regarding the mentioned list provided to the participants, the researchers collected the experiences and opinions of this group of participants about the indicators of attraction. Then, they prepared the final list of absorption, weighting, and scoring indices. These meetings continued until the status of all indicators was determined, and when the meetings were over, the researchers confirmed comprehensiveness and transparency of its indicators and elements. The focus group meetings answered the questions openly. Before saving the comments by a tape recorder, the interviewees were allowed to assure that the recorded conversations are just recorded by the researcher and that their content is going to be used without mentioning their names or details.
Immediately after the interview, the researchers registered their observations and impressions of the interviews, new ideas, the success rate of the interview focused on obtaining information and effective communication with the participants, and the points that should be considered in the rest of the interviews. At the first opportunity after the intensive interview, the recorded conversations were transcribed verbatim by the researcher; the words of the interviewer and the interviewee were written in different colors so that they could be easily distinguished. New ideas were recorded in a different color to distinguish them from the main statements of the interviewees. Data analysis was performed based on content analysis based on the report of information obtained from the consensus of members in the focus group meetings so that the decisions of the participants in the meeting to remove and add or modify each of the indicators could accurately be identified and reported. In this case, the analysis of the data begins with reading them repeatedly to gain a full understanding. The data were classified and organized based on their similarities and differences. Then, according to the priorities, a final list of absorption indices with specified and scored coefficients was compiled. Finally, according to the content and priorities of the interviews and reviewing the texts, the proposed framework was designed.
Results
To achieve the objectives of the research, the data related to the study were collected in the form of interviews with a focus group of experts in the field of faculty recruitment. Then the data were analyzed by content analysis.
Demographic data of the participants showed that 53 males (73.2%) and 19 females (26.8%) participated in the study. The mean age of the ones born in the 40s was 40 with 56.3%. The highest scientific rank of the participants related to the scientific rank of 26 professors with 36.6%. In addition, the highest work experience related to people with one or two decades of work experience, 34 people (47.9%).
In this section, the present researchers reviewed the most important measures mentioned in terms of research sources and experts' views. According to the regulations approved by the Cultural Revolution Council on faculty recruitment since 2015 and implemented in all universities, the research findings showed that the research and educational components in the form of academic ability scores of candidates in this regulation (the relevant form is attached), needs to be changed and revised. Finally, the appropriate actions identified by researchers based on data analysis. These proposed amendments are listed in Supplement 1.
Discussion
Based on the findings, the scores form of the faculty candidate's academic ability requires some changes. These changes must be made in the sections of every score of the form components and the scoring method, as well as the necessary documentation for scoring. The proposed form is given in the findings section. The requested amendments are described in detail for each of the components.
In Iran, there have been many changes and developments regarding the recruitment of faculty, the latest of which is a process that has been designed since 2008, and now it forms the process of recruiting the faculty of the country; however, this process has brought approvals and objections. Some university professors, including Modarres Hashemi (2012), believed that the latter method has logical, legal, managerial, customary, and experimental problems. Javadani (2012) also criticized the centralized and top-down approach to the process. Faraskhah (2003) considered one of the requirements of scientific freedom as the independence of universities and the right to choose and select professors, which is somewhat opposed to the current semi-centralized approach. In contrast, Mardani et al. (2013) defended the existing process by mentioning points such as limiting tastes and creating a unity of procedure and increasing justice (8).
Considering that all available studies only examined the status of recruitment and employment policies and no study was done on recruitment indicators based on the form of academic ability scores of volunteer faculty members, it is important to express the similarities and differences of the method and Research results of previous studies with the present study.
In two studies in 2016, Mossadegh et al. examined the extraction of appropriate faculty recruitment measures for public universities of the Ministry of Science, Research and Technology based on the views of recruitment experts and the pathology of the faculty recruitment process in public universities of the Ministry of Science, Research and technology. The study was important because the library method was used to investigate the harms of absorption, and the content analysis method was used with the structured interview tool to examine the opinions of absorption experts. The faculty recruiters were identified by a purposive sampling method, similar to the present study on how to conduct research and sampling method, and the results showed that the current faculty recruitment method has problems that need to be reviewed and amended (9,10).
Two studies by Tatari et al. in 2016 reviewed human resource management models for hiring faculty members and a comprehensive approach to employment policies for faculty members under a critical review article. These two studies were based on reviewing and collecting studies using extensive and structured search of databases. In these two studies, recruitment policies were reviewed and it was demonstrated that it is possible to evaluate applicants with new interview methods based on their competency and value to adopt a recruitment model based on competency, achievement, and employment of valuable and capable personnel in the university. It is acceptable that the policies of the faculty recruitment process are associated with problems that must be designed and implemented following the current needs (11, 12).
The study of Nourbakhsh and Sepehr in 2012 at the University of Isfahan examined the indicators of university faculty recruitment using the Electra model. Since this study was conducted by the Delphi method with the help of the opinions of 30 faculty members and by stakeholders, the Electra algorithm scored the absorption indices. In this study, the indicators were determined based on the Electra algorithm and the amount of regretion about the decision to hire a faculty member was determined; however, it was found that if the Electra model is used in selecting a faculty member, the recruitment process will improve. This study only examined the current policies in absorption based on a comparative model (4).
In the study of Ghorchian and Islampanah in 2004, the status of recruitment, retention, and promotion of the faculty of the Islamic Azad University was examined and an appropriate model to improve the current situation was presented. In this regard, two types of questionnaires were designed, the first questionnaire determined the importance and priority of components and the second questionnaire determined the elements of the model. The result of this study showed that the proposed model in recruitment and employment policies is highly relevant to the recruitment process and experts who were satisfied with this proposed model, but this study also analyzed the existing policies in recruitment (13).
Meshkini's study in 2014 examined the methods of recruitment, employment, and promotion of clinical faculty members from the perspective of faculty members. The study was conducted by surveying 30 faculty members. In this study, a questionnaire was prepared and sent to more than 30 expert professors in this field. By collecting the answers of 21 of them, the results were statistically analyzed and it was demonstrated that experts believed the current trend of employing faculty members’ full-time geographically (deprivation of office) and necessarily throughout the service period in terms of effective teaching; however, the research was inefficient for the university and needs to be reviewed. Since this study was for clinical faculty members and paid special attention to the conditions and problems of this group, it was very different from the present study in terms of implementation method, which was a questionnaire and the statistical results was quantitative (2).
The results showed that no studies were conducted on the recruitment indicators based on the form of academic ability scores of the volunteer faculty member. In addition, due to the lack of valid indicators and sufficient research in this field, it is necessary to improve the indicators of faculty recruitment and sufficient research in this field. In this regard, the present study aimed to examine the specific indicators of the academic ability scoring form of the volunteer faculty member; it can be specific to the results of the study and innovation and fundamental change in improving the process of attracting faculty members of universities.
The present study, which examined the status of faculty recruitment indicators of Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, is the only study conducted in the field of reviewing the form of volunteer scientific ability scores in the faculty recruitment regulations of universities. Considering the scientific progress of the country, compiling a comprehensive scientific map, the special position, and the special role of universities in promoting science and raising the quality of education and research, it is necessary to attract and evaluate faculty members as the main factors of development and progress. Special attention should be paid to the university, and the reform of faculty recruitment indicators is an important part of this attention. Therefore, since this study has tried to refer to the university elite and stakeholders in the matter of recruitment, collecting their views through correct and scientific methods could be reflected as corrective suggestions to the relevant authorities to amend the recruitment regulations. It is suggested that the authorities review the relevant form mentioned in the finding section and send the results to the universities as a new corrective form for the recruitment process.
Ethical considerations
Ethical issues (Including plagiarism, informed consent, misconduct, data fabrication and/or falsification, double publication and/or submission, redundancy, etc.) have been completely observed by the authors.
Acknowledgment
Special thanks to the University Vice Chancellor for Research for the support and cooperation. The sincere cooperation of the participants in the research is also appreciated.
Financial Support
This study is the result of the implementation of the master's thesis in medical education approved by Mashhad University of Medical Sciences with the code 970888, which has been done with the financial support of the Vice Chancellor for Research.
Conflicts of interest
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Supplement 1. Revisions about the current form of the indexes of faculty members recruitment
|
r |
Subject |
Maximum Score |
Scoring Method |
Basic Score |
Required Documentation |
|
1 |
Ability to teach, and prepare lesson plans |
20 |
Transfering specialized concepts (interview) in the committee Quality of independent teaching (in case of providing a degree of educational evaluation) New ideas for Microteaching Interview and evaluation of the candidate by the faculty members of the same field (in terms of accuracy in the scientific selection of materials, power of expression, etc). Utilizing the capabilities of new technologies in the presentation |
8 points
3 points
2 points 5 points
2 points
|
Microteaching Interviews and Evaluations (Depending on the major, either in the laboratory or clinical environment) |
|
- - Emphasizing the need for this item and increasing its score to 30 points; it is better to seek help from options such as assessment in a real environment like classroom by experts, evaluation by students participating in the volunteer classroom, presentation in retraining courses by the volunteer, faculty evaluation of the same field in the scoring method section to make the evaluation more accurate and to consider the options of "evaluating the use of the capabilities of new technologies in the presentation" and "designing new ideas for presentation”. - - Considering that the application of the capabilities of new technologies in the presentation can not be easily evaluated, it is better to remove it. - - The preparation of the lesson plan should be removed from this item and transferred to another place. For instance, it should be included in the teaching records and its score should be transparent. - - Considering that the scoring method is not considered for preparing the lesson plan mentioned in the title, it is better to have an EDO or EDC approved certificate for the course plan or lesson plan. |
|||||
|
2 |
Teaching Experience |
5 |
Each university teaching credit For clinical specialists, every 50 hours of participation in the training of students and interns (especially the Ministry of Health, Treatment and Medical Education) For candidates: every 50 hours participate in the training of students and trainees |
0.5 points 0.5 points
0.5 points |
Valid Certificate |
|
- In this item, the score limit is low and the score should be increased to 10 or the score limit should be removed, since based on this score, all candidates having taught more than 10 credits receive the maximum score and the importance of this item in making a comparison between candidates is reduced. - Due to the importance of virtual education in today's world, it is better to consider some points for this item's scoring method. - Teaching in training courses, workshops, and continuing education must also be considered and the certificates issued for these courses must be approved by the Vice-Chancellor of the university. - Scoring in this item should be divided according to teaching in the university with different types, for example, type 1 university has 0.5 points per credit taught and type 2 has 0.4 points per credit taught and so on. |
|||||
|
3 |
Publication of articles in scientific-research, scientific-promotional journals and other journals licensed by the Commission of Medical Sciences Journals |
15 |
ISI International Scientific-Research Articles International ISC and domestic scientific-research articles Scientific-promotional articles Other articles Note: The points of the first, second, and third authors are calculated according to the promotion regulations. |
4 points 3 points
0.5 points 0.25 points |
Relevant Articles |
|
- Considering that there are many differences in the scoring method in educational and research items in the faculties of basic and clinical sciences, it should be taken into account that in this item in the faculties of basic sciences, the maximum of 15 points is low and it has to increase and reach 20 to 30 points. They even believed that the maximum score should lift, but in general, in this item, all experts agreed that it would be fairer if research items were scored according to the promotion regulations. |
|||||
|
4 |
Presenting papers in national and international congresses |
5 |
Full papers in international congresses Abstracts in International Congresses Complete papers in national congresses Abstracts in National Congresses |
0.5-1 points 0.25 points 0.25-0.5 points 0.15 points |
Relevant Articles |
|
- This item and its score as well as the scoring method are appropriate and it is better to score according to the promotion regulations. |
|||||
|
5 |
Compilation and translation of books in the specialized field of the individual |
15 |
1. Production of a novel work of art with the approval of the jury 2. Compilation of a composition and reference book 3. Author of the book (reputable foreign publications) 4. Author of the book (University Publications) 5. Writing a book (non-academic publications) 6. Compiling a book based on his research achievements 7. Author of a collection of books such as encyclopedias 8. Compiling a book in a field not related to the author's specialized field 9. Compilation of printed books as educational resources 10. Scientific editing of books 11. Compilation of a part of the book 12. Reprinting a written book if at least 20% of its content has been modified or added 13. Translation of the book |
15 points
10 points 8 points
6 points 4 points 3 points
3 points
1.5 points
1.5 points
1 point 1 point 0.5 points
1 point |
Relevant book |
|
- - Acknowledging this item is very valuable, but the maximum score is very high and should be reduced to nearly 10 points, and in this item, it is better to upgrade points according to the regulations. - In the scoring method option, the cases of "production of a novel work of art with the approval of the jury" must be specified, clear, and fully explained. Studies show that in the promotion regulations, this option is rated in the cultural-educational section and is defined as follows: Approval of the - ------ Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance”. - - In the scoring method options "writing a book in a field not related to the author's specialty" with the original title, ie "writing and translating a book in the field of the individual" does not match and it is better to be removed. |
|||||
|
6 |
Executor or collaborator in research projects |
10 |
The executive of the national research project: The main associate of the national research project: The executive of a research project: The main associate of the research project: |
4 points
2 points
1 point 0.5 point
|
Valid certificate |
|
- As suggested in the previous research items, this item should be calculated based on the promotion regulations, and the completed research projects must earn points. |
|||||
|
7 |
Membership in the editorial board or arbitration in a prestigious scientific journal or congressional faculty |
5 |
Assessing and evaluating articles; each issue: Membership in the editorial board of journals with an impact factor of two years of international journals based on SCOPUS, ISI, ISC above 0.6; each issue: Membership in the editorial board of domestic journals approved by the Ministry of Science, Research and Technology and the Ministry of Health, Treatment and Medical Education Membership in the faculty of Congress |
0.5 points 2 points
1 point
0.5 points |
Valid documentation |
|
- This item and the intended score should be less and a maximum of 3 is sufficient. - It is better to divide the scoring based on the type of magazine. For example, take the English language magazine, Persian language magazine, SCOPUS, PubMed, etc. to judge the magazine and give a score of 0.1 for each article. For membership in the editorial board, the scores should be as follows: for ISI journals, a score of 2, for PUBMED, a score of 1.5, then for SCOPUS, a score of 1, and for ISC journals and other scientific research journals, a score of 0.5 is appropriate. |
|||||
|
8 |
Membership in the National Elite Foundation and Talent Offices |
10 |
A member supported by the National Elite Foundation by presenting a valid certificate Membership in the Talent Office |
10 points 4 points |
Valid Documentation |
|
- This item is proper, but the score is high and it is better to reduce its score to 5. Membership in the National Elite Foundation is different from membership in the Office of Talents. For the Talent Office, 4 points are too much and 2 points are sufficient. - The method and reason for membership in the National Elite Foundation and the Office of Talents should be precisely specified, and different scores should be considered in proportion to the percentage of activity of individuals in the foundation. |
|||||
|
9 |
Receiving an award from a prestigious scientific festival or olympiad
Scientific honors such as an exemplary student of the country, national festivals, first to third ranks of entrance exam in the field and the graduate first rank of master's and doctoral courses and first, second and third ranks of specialized and sub-specialized exams
|
15 |
International festivals such as (Kharazmi, Farabi, Imam Khomeini, the Great Prophet, inventors and inventors, Fajr Film, Fajr Theater, Fajr Music) National and university festivals such as (Razi, Motahhari, Ibn Sina, Abu Reihan, Sheikh Baha'i, Quran, national domestic research festivals and national olympiads) Other items (including appreciation and encouragement) Note: Points are divided between process owners. National and international student scientific competitions First place in the entrance exam in the field Graduated from the first rank of master's and doctoral courses and the best student in the country World Student Olympiad Medal (for each color of medal) National Student Olympiad Medal (Gold Medal Only) Gold medal of the National Student Olympiad National exam ranks: first five people 5 points, the next five people 4 points, the next five people 3 points, the next five people 2 points, the next five people 1 point (can be calculated in each section) Award for overseas students Note: The award for students abroad must be approved by the Ministries of Science, Research and Technology of the Ministry of Health, Treatment and Medical Education. * First, second and third rank of specialized boards, respectively * First, second and third rank of the subspecialty board, respectively The first, second and third national ranks of the specialized encyclopedia and the national entrance exam for the specialized doctorate (Ph.D.), respectively |
5 points
2 points
3 points
5 points 3 points
5 points
5 points 3 points 4 points
3 points
5, 7, and 10 points 3, 5, and 7 points
3, 5, and 7 points |
Valid Documentation |
|
The item is fitting, but its score limit is higher than other important items and should be less, and a maximum of 10 points is enough. In this item, it is better to consider the second and third ranks of the MA degree for scoring. |
|||||
|
10 |
Ability to use modern electronic capabilities and databases |
5 |
Objective observation of the volunteer‘s performance |
|
Direct assessment by the Scientific Ability Working Group |
|
Meta-competencies are important and well-considered in this item. It is excellent, considering that in this item, the committee arranges a direct evaluation to check the scientific ability. The databases should be checked as updates. |
|||||
|
11 |
Fluency in common language in scientific societies (Arabic-English-French-German, etc). |
10 |
IELTS 8-9, TOEFL 650-677 and MCH 90-100: IELTS 7, TOFEL 650-600 and MCHE 90-70: IELTS 6, TOFEL 600-500 and MCHE 70-50: Other languages with a valid certificate: Direct assessment of reading, comprehension, speaking and writing skills in these languages: |
5 points
4 points 3 points 2 points 3 points |
Valid certification or direct evaluation by the Scientific Competence Assessment Working Group |
|
- This item is very important and it is better to increase the score in each test in a gradual way so the differences will be significant. In this section, evaluation should be done both from a valid document and as a direct evaluation. - Since the MHLE test is not defined in the options, it should be included and the scores should be similar to the MCHE test scores. - In the specialized committee, individuals who are fluent in other common languages must be present to examine the candidates, because the mastery of certain languages is discussed in certain groups. For instance, fluency in Arabic plays a key role in the Islamic Teaching Department. |
|||||
|
12 |
GPA of bachelor's, master's and doctoral grades and master's and doctoral dissertation scores |
5 |
Undergraduate GPA 17-18 0.75 points 18-19 point 1 19-20 1.5 points
Masters GPA 17-18 points 0.5 18-19 1 points 19-20 points 1.5 18.30 to 20 Thesis from points0.25
GPA of doctoral degree 17-18 point1 18-19 points 1.5 19-20 points 2 Thesis from 18.30 to 20 points 0.25 |
|
|
|
- The item and its score are appropriate. However, paragraphs 12 and 8 overlap, as if it is because of the grade point average that a person becomes a member of the Office of Talents, so it is better not to include the same score in two items. - In this item, the dissertation score should be deleted because the dissertation score is quite ceremonial. |
|||||
|
13 |
The quality of the university in which the last degree was obtained |
5 |
Eligible university: Non-eligible university: Foreign University approved by the Ministries of Science, Research and Technology and Health, Treatment and Medical Education: |
5 points points 3
1.5 points |
|
|
- This item is suitable, but the university with a non-university should be clearly defined and specified. Type 1, 2, and 3 universities and Azad University and Payame Noor and others should be identified and scored. - Defining a privileged and non-privileged university and an Azad University, as well as the scores should be 5, 3 and 1, respectively (for instance, privileged universities include: Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, which were able to be among the top 10 medical universities in the country and achieve 5 points in 2017-2018. Other medical universities received a score of 3, and Azad Universities of Medical Sciences get a score of 1). |
|||||
|
14 |
The quality of the university in which the previouse degrees were obtained |
5 |
Eligible university: Non-eligible university: Foreign University approved by the Ministries of Science, Research and Technology and Health, Treatment and Medical Education: |
5 points 3 points 1.5 points |
|
|
Paragraphs 13 and 14 are proper items, but item 14 may not be as important as item 13, but in these two items, the university with and without the university should be clearly defined and specified, or the type 1, 2, and 3 universities. Also Azad University, Payame Noor, and the rest should be identified and scored. Defining a privileged and non-privileged university, an Azad University, and the scores should be 5, 3 and 1, respectively (for instance, privileged universities include: Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, which were able to be among the top 10 medical universities in the country and achieve 5 points in 2017-2018. Other medical universities receive a score of 3, and Azad Universities of Medical Sciences get a score of 1). |
|||||
|
15 |
Technological activities |
12 |
Internal patent with scientific approval One year post-industrial doctorate with the approval of the Ministry of Industry and the Ministry of Science (participation in research and development) Global patent according to Euro patent and US patent standards Commercialization of technology with the approval of the Vice President for Science and Technology Acquisition and sale of technical knowledge with the approval of the Vice President for Science and Technology |
2 points 5 points
6 points
5 points
4 points |
|
|
The item and its score are appropriate and it is suggested that the score be provided only for each related patent. In addition, the national patent requires scientific approval. It is better to get an approval from the Ministry of Health or the Scientific and Industrial Research Organization of Iran. The section "one-year post-doctoral background in the industry with the approval of the Ministry of Industry and the Ministry of Science should be corrected and changed to one-year post-doctoral background approved by the Ministry of Health. |
|||||
|
16 |
Launching educational activities |
5 |
Creating a unit, laboratory, faculty, department, new field; each: |
3 points |
|
|
- This item and its rating are appropriate. For this section, the approval of the competent authorities or a valid document must be provided in the documentation section by the EDC of the university. The score must be assigned to the person in proportion to his / her share in the activity. |
|||||
|
17 |
* Professional service background as a faculty member |
4 |
Maximum per year |
2 points |
|
|
The item is very proper, but it is better to increase its score, because the longer the time the person is under observation before recruitment, it is preferable, and up to 10 points can be assigned to this item. In addition, a maximum of 1 point should be considered for each year. |
|||||
|
18 |
Scientific certificate in addition to the degree and participation in specialized workshops |
10 |
* MPH Course Certificate: * Presentation of MS degree: * Certificate of 6-month to 1-year courses abroad: * Having a Ph.D. degree for clinical disciplines (in addition to a specialized degree in the main field): * Having an MD degree for basic sciences: * Certificate of teaching method workshops, research methods, and specialized workshops: * Certificate of membership in EDC: * Edo Membership Certificate: |
3 points 4 points 4 points
7 points 5 points 2 points
2 points 2 points |
Valid Certificate |
|
This item is suitable, but in case of membership in EDC and EDO, the points should be defined for each year and should be 0.2 and 0.1, respectively, and they should have a maximum of 2 points for EDC and 1 point for EDO. A maximum of 2 points is sufficient in the section of how to score "Certificate of 6-month to 1-year courses abroad”. The postdoc certificate is very important and gets 0.5 or 1 point per year. |
|||||
|
19 |
Designing training packages |
2 |
Providing educational materials including educational posters, learning guides, or educational software |
0.5 points |
Provided Educational Materials |
|
This item is proper because it relates to the field of education. Designing educational packages is required for students, but a score of 2 is less than research items. The score of the educational software should be higher than the poster and pamphlet, and the scores of each educational material should be determined separately (for example, for the educational software, the score should be 1 point, the learning guide should be 0.5 points, and the poster and pamphlet should be 0.25 points). Except the mentioned scoring method, if an item is highlighted and approved by EDC, it should be scored. The training materials must be with a valid certificate from EDC or EDO and if it is specialized, it must be approved by the relevant authority. |
|||||
|
20 |
Special technical / clinical skills in a specialized field |
20 |
This point is awarded based on a recommendation from the direct volunteer professors in the specialized course or a valid certificate and evaluation by the relevant department. Note: The working group for examining scientific ability can also use the working group for examining general competence in this regard. |
|
|
|
This item is very effective in medicine because if it can properly transfer the experience one gains, it can be a cornerstone of teaching skills. However, just a letter of recommendation from the professors cannot be trusted because giving points to this item is a matter of taste and 20 score is too much for it. If 20 points are to be awarded, the scoring method must be defined more legally and accurately, or even a form must be prepared for the professors or a group of volunteer colleagues to comment on the individual's skill level and give the person a score. The letter of recommendation should reveal that the person interacts with the group and he can work in the team and be a member of the group. A recommendation letter is also valuable when it reaches the recruiting team in complete secrecy and without the individual's knowledge. You can even do a 360-degree examination of the volunteer. A person may have long clinical experience but not sufficient clinical skills. Therefore, just as we use microteaching for teaching ability, we must also define the test of assessing one's clinical skills like the OSCE, to assess properly the clinical skills of volunteer faculty members so that this item can get 25 points. For each year of clinical work experience, getting 1 point with a maximum of 5 points is sufficient. For 20 points, we define 2 stations, which mean we must have 2 types of scenarios: First, a scenario that assesses the volunteer’s clinical skills that are similar to the scenarios we give to the student but more specialized, and secondly, a clinical training scenario to see how they want to teach a clinical skill to the student. |
|||||
|
Corrections requested to add items to the list: |
|||||
|
- It is better to put group approval indicators for each item and the person should return from work with a confidential letter of recommendation and group approval. - The items in each faculty and field should have different coefficients, or at least they should be in the form of basic and clinical disciplines. - The most important challenge of a fixed model in terms of points and elements are the differences that each field may have in the content or at the time of faculty recruitment, which is not taken into account. Therefore, defining and proposing elements of work is very good, but it is better to leave the points and the selection of elements to the groups themselves according to the field and need. This must also be done and be applied so that candidates may have the opportunity to adapt to it. - It is better to add a column to the checklist, which group or organization should evaluate each item, and the caller reference should be specified too. . |
|||||
)
