This document outlines the UGC Regulations 2018 regarding faculty promotions in India. It discusses the various designations and academic levels, as well as two options - Option A and Option B - for the promotion assessment process.
Option A involves annual self-assessments across three categories: teaching, university/college activities, and research publications. It provides grading criteria and requirements to progress from Assistant Professor to Associate Professor and Professor.
Option B allows promotion assessments per the UGC Regulations 2010 up until July 2021, exempting certain API scoring and providing flexibility in research publication requirements. Promotion requirements vary based on years of service, minimum API scores, and completion of orientation courses and refresher courses.
The document provides information about the Career Advancement Scheme (CAS) for higher education faculty in India. It discusses the eligibility requirements, assessment criteria, and promotion stages under both the CAS 2010 and CAS 2018 regulations.
Some key points include:
- CAS 2018 and the relaxed CAS 2010 provide options for promotion that are available before and after July 18, 2018.
- There are four promotion stages from Assistant Professor to Professor with requirements for years of service, training, publications, and other academic activities.
- CAS 2018 focuses more on performance assessments in APAR reports while CAS 2010 had quantitative API score requirements that have been relaxed in some cases.
- The assessment process under CAS 2018 involves grading teaching and involvement in university
ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (API) FOR CAREER ADVANCEMENT SCHEME (CAS) PROMOTIONS FOR ASSISTANT PROFESSOR, ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR AND PROFESSOR IN UNIVERSITIES AND COLLEGES
Category-I : Teaching, Learning and Evaluation Related Activities
Category-II : Professional Development, Co-Curricular and Extension Activities
Category-III : Research and Academic Contributions
The document discusses the National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC) in India, which assesses and accredits higher education institutions. Some key points:
- NAAC was established in 1994 by the University Grants Commission to address deteriorating education quality. It conducts peer-based assessments and assigns grades to institutions every 5 years.
- Accreditation provides benefits like identifying strengths/weaknesses, obtaining public and funding agency recognition, and encouraging innovative teaching. It aims to improve quality, accountability, and collaboration in higher education.
- The assessment process results in a peer team report and institutional grade based on criteria. Grades range from A++ to D, with higher grades indicating better accredited status
The Revised Assessment and Accreditation Framework is launched in July 2017. It represents an explicit Paradigm Shift making it ICT enabled, objective, transparent, scalable and robust. The Shift is:
• from qualitative peer judgement to data based quantitative indicator evaluation with increased objectivity and transparency
• towards extensive use of ICT confirming scalability and robustness
• in terms of simplification of the process drastic reduction in number of questions, size of the report, visit days, and so on
• in terms of boosting benchmark as quality improvement tool. This has been attempted through comparison of NAAC indicators with other international QA frameworks
• introducing Prequalifier for peer team visit
• introducing System Generated Scores (SGS) with combination of online evaluation (about 70%) and peer judgement (about 30%)
• in introducing the element of third party validation of data
• in providing appropriate differences in the metrics, weightages and benchmarks to universities, autonomous colleges and affiliated/constituent colleges
• in revising several metrics to bring in enhanced participation of students and alumni in the assessment process.
This document provides information about accreditation and the NAAC assessment process. It discusses why accreditation is important for improving quality in higher education. The benefits of accreditation for institutions and stakeholders are outlined. The seven criteria used by NAAC for assessment are described in detail, including key performance indicators under each criterion. Guidelines are provided for institutions to prepare for the accreditation process, such as establishing vision/mission statements, developing websites, enhancing facilities and resources, collecting feedback, and conducting self-analysis. Overall, the document aims to outline the NAAC accreditation framework and support institutions in undergoing quality assessment.
Revised Framework of NAAC ASSESSMENT AND ACCREDITATION (From Jan 2023).pdfDr. Santhosh Hrishikesh
_____
Associate:_____
Professor:_____
2.4.1.2 Number of full-time teachers during the last five years:_____
20
2.4.2.
QnM
Percentage of teachers with Ph.D. during the last five years
2.4.2.1 Number of teachers with Ph.D. during the last five years:_____
20
47
santhoshhrishikesh@gmail.com
Key Indicator- 2.5 Evaluation Process
and Reforms (40)
Metric
No.
Weightage
2.5.1.
QlM
Mechanism of internal assessment is
NAAC (Criterion-I : Curricular Aspects for Autonomous Engineering Colleges)Dr.Raja R
This document provides information on curricular aspects for autonomous engineering colleges. It discusses the key indicators being assessed, including curriculum design and development, academic flexibility, curriculum enrichment, and feedback systems. Under each key indicator, it lists the quantitative metrics and documents required for assessment. It then provides templates for collecting quantitative data on various metrics, such as percentage of syllabus revision, courses focusing on employability/entrepreneurship, new courses introduced, implementation of choice based credit systems, and value added courses imparting life skills.
This document outlines the UGC Regulations 2018 regarding faculty promotions in India. It discusses the various designations and academic levels, as well as two options - Option A and Option B - for the promotion assessment process.
Option A involves annual self-assessments across three categories: teaching, university/college activities, and research publications. It provides grading criteria and requirements to progress from Assistant Professor to Associate Professor and Professor.
Option B allows promotion assessments per the UGC Regulations 2010 up until July 2021, exempting certain API scoring and providing flexibility in research publication requirements. Promotion requirements vary based on years of service, minimum API scores, and completion of orientation courses and refresher courses.
The document provides information about the Career Advancement Scheme (CAS) for higher education faculty in India. It discusses the eligibility requirements, assessment criteria, and promotion stages under both the CAS 2010 and CAS 2018 regulations.
Some key points include:
- CAS 2018 and the relaxed CAS 2010 provide options for promotion that are available before and after July 18, 2018.
- There are four promotion stages from Assistant Professor to Professor with requirements for years of service, training, publications, and other academic activities.
- CAS 2018 focuses more on performance assessments in APAR reports while CAS 2010 had quantitative API score requirements that have been relaxed in some cases.
- The assessment process under CAS 2018 involves grading teaching and involvement in university
ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (API) FOR CAREER ADVANCEMENT SCHEME (CAS) PROMOTIONS FOR ASSISTANT PROFESSOR, ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR AND PROFESSOR IN UNIVERSITIES AND COLLEGES
Category-I : Teaching, Learning and Evaluation Related Activities
Category-II : Professional Development, Co-Curricular and Extension Activities
Category-III : Research and Academic Contributions
The document discusses the National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC) in India, which assesses and accredits higher education institutions. Some key points:
- NAAC was established in 1994 by the University Grants Commission to address deteriorating education quality. It conducts peer-based assessments and assigns grades to institutions every 5 years.
- Accreditation provides benefits like identifying strengths/weaknesses, obtaining public and funding agency recognition, and encouraging innovative teaching. It aims to improve quality, accountability, and collaboration in higher education.
- The assessment process results in a peer team report and institutional grade based on criteria. Grades range from A++ to D, with higher grades indicating better accredited status
The Revised Assessment and Accreditation Framework is launched in July 2017. It represents an explicit Paradigm Shift making it ICT enabled, objective, transparent, scalable and robust. The Shift is:
• from qualitative peer judgement to data based quantitative indicator evaluation with increased objectivity and transparency
• towards extensive use of ICT confirming scalability and robustness
• in terms of simplification of the process drastic reduction in number of questions, size of the report, visit days, and so on
• in terms of boosting benchmark as quality improvement tool. This has been attempted through comparison of NAAC indicators with other international QA frameworks
• introducing Prequalifier for peer team visit
• introducing System Generated Scores (SGS) with combination of online evaluation (about 70%) and peer judgement (about 30%)
• in introducing the element of third party validation of data
• in providing appropriate differences in the metrics, weightages and benchmarks to universities, autonomous colleges and affiliated/constituent colleges
• in revising several metrics to bring in enhanced participation of students and alumni in the assessment process.
This document provides information about accreditation and the NAAC assessment process. It discusses why accreditation is important for improving quality in higher education. The benefits of accreditation for institutions and stakeholders are outlined. The seven criteria used by NAAC for assessment are described in detail, including key performance indicators under each criterion. Guidelines are provided for institutions to prepare for the accreditation process, such as establishing vision/mission statements, developing websites, enhancing facilities and resources, collecting feedback, and conducting self-analysis. Overall, the document aims to outline the NAAC accreditation framework and support institutions in undergoing quality assessment.
Revised Framework of NAAC ASSESSMENT AND ACCREDITATION (From Jan 2023).pdfDr. Santhosh Hrishikesh
_____
Associate:_____
Professor:_____
2.4.1.2 Number of full-time teachers during the last five years:_____
20
2.4.2.
QnM
Percentage of teachers with Ph.D. during the last five years
2.4.2.1 Number of teachers with Ph.D. during the last five years:_____
20
47
santhoshhrishikesh@gmail.com
Key Indicator- 2.5 Evaluation Process
and Reforms (40)
Metric
No.
Weightage
2.5.1.
QlM
Mechanism of internal assessment is
NAAC (Criterion-I : Curricular Aspects for Autonomous Engineering Colleges)Dr.Raja R
This document provides information on curricular aspects for autonomous engineering colleges. It discusses the key indicators being assessed, including curriculum design and development, academic flexibility, curriculum enrichment, and feedback systems. Under each key indicator, it lists the quantitative metrics and documents required for assessment. It then provides templates for collecting quantitative data on various metrics, such as percentage of syllabus revision, courses focusing on employability/entrepreneurship, new courses introduced, implementation of choice based credit systems, and value added courses imparting life skills.
The document provides information about the Internal Quality Assurance Cell (IQAC) of Gautam Buddha Mahila College in Gaya, India. It outlines the following key details:
1. The composition and roles of the IQAC committee, which includes the principal, faculty members, students, parents, and alumni.
2. The vision, mission, goals, and functions of the IQAC which aim to promote quality in teaching, learning, research, extension activities, governance, and innovations.
3. The various mechanisms adopted by the IQAC to ensure quality, including curriculum development, teaching-learning processes, research, community engagement programs, student-centric learning, and best practices.
It is about NAAC criterion3 Research, Innovations and Extension. It describes all key indicators in details with explanation. It is useful for the colleges to improve NAAC grade.
The document outlines the criteria and process for quality assurance and accreditation of higher education institutions in India by the National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC). It discusses the 7 criteria that are assessed, including curricular aspects, teaching-learning and evaluation, research, infrastructure, student support, governance, and innovative practices. Institutions are given an institutional cumulative grade point average (CGPA) on a scale of 1 to 4 based on their performance across the 7 criteria to determine their accreditation level.
NAAC Presentation - Dr HK Garg, Sarojini Naidu Govt Girls College BhopalPROFESSOR Dr. H.K. Garg
This presentation is an overview of all necessary facts & figures pertaining to our College for assessment and accreditation. It is not a more plethora of achievements; rather, it is revelation of a path we have adhered to. Let us invite you to reel through the pages and be a part of our legacy.
Prof HK Garg, Coordinator IQAC & NAAC Steering Committee.
Principal presentation for NAAC on 22-23 March ,2021.Dr. Neha Rani
Government College Narnaund (Hisar) welcomed the NAAC peer team for their accreditation visit on March 22-23, 2021. The college was established in 2013 and is affiliated with Guru Jambheshwar University of Science and Technology Hisar. It offers undergraduate programs across 16 departments and has a student body of over 800. The college aims to provide quality education to rural students while developing critical thinking and social responsibility.
An all-inclusive procedure of Assessment & Accreditation of Higher Education Institutions, including Universities, Autonomous, Affiliated and Constituent Colleges (all Government institutions, Grant-in-aid colleges or Self-financed institutes) in India.
It explains step wise process of Registration, Online submission of IIQA (Institutional Information for Quality Assessment); SSR (Self-Study Report); DVV (Data Validation and Verification); SSS (Student Satisfaction Survey); PTV (Peer Team Visit); and Institutional Grading.
The document summarizes the academic audit process used by the Tennessee Board of Regents to promote continuous quality improvement at institutions. The process involves a self-study where institutions evaluate their performance across focal areas like learning objectives and teaching. Auditors then visit to provide feedback and recommendations. Institutions then implement initiatives to address areas for growth. The goal is to use the recurrent audit process to demonstrate effectiveness and improve teaching and learning over time.
Professor/
Professor/
Professor
Professor
Equivalent
Equivalent
(Stage 4) to
(Stage 5) to
caderies
(Stage 1 to
(Stage 2)
Professor
Professor
Stage 2)
(Stage 3)
(Stage 4)
(Stage 5)
I Teaching-learning, Evaluation Related Activities (Category - I)
75 / Year
75 / Year
75 / Year
75 / Year
II Co-Curricular, Extension and Profession related activities (Category II)
15 / Year
15 / Year
15
The document discusses the National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC) of India. It provides the following key points:
- NAAC was established in 1994 by the University Grants Commission to assess and accredit institutions of higher education in India.
- NAAC accreditation ensures quality standards in higher education by assessing institutions based on criteria like curricular aspects, teaching-learning and evaluation, research and infrastructure.
- The assessment results in an overall grade for the institution on a scale of A++ to C. Key indicators include curricular planning, teacher quality, research publications, facilities, student support and governance.
Naac presentation education department - central university of keralaThiyagu K
This power-point was prepared for the purpose of NAAC Peer team visit to our Department of Education, Central University of Kerala on 25th October 2016. It is my pleasure to share our department profile power-point in this social platform...
The criteria based assessment forms the backbone of A&A process of NAAC. The seven criteria represent the core functions and activities of a HEI. In the revised framework not only the academic and administrative aspects of institutional functioning but also the emerging issues have been included. The seven Criteria to serve as basis for assessment of HEIs are:
2. Teaching-Learning and Evaluation
3. Research, Innovations and Extension
4. Infrastructure and Learning Resources
5. Student Support and Progression
6. Governance, Leadership and Management
7. Institutional Values and Best Practices
Under each Criterion a few Key Indicators are identified. These Key Indicators (KIs) are further delineated as Metrics which actually elicit responses from the HEIs. These seven criteria along with their KIs are given below explicating the aspects they represent.
My Presentation as Principal of VAMCC ,before NAAC TEAM - Sunil Sharma
VAMCC apply for 2nd cycle to NAAC for its gradation. The team arrived for visit as per schedule. on 8th April-2015 , the proceeding kicked off with my PPT presentation. Here I am uploading the same to guide others
Nba & pre qualifier for accreditationmrinalmanik64
The document discusses the details of pre-qualifiers for NBA accreditation. It explains that NBA accreditation is a process that ensures quality in higher education. It operates on a two-tier system for autonomous and non-autonomous institutions. Pre-qualifiers include basic institution details, program information, faculty and student details, and criteria like student intake percentages and faculty-student ratios. Meeting these pre-qualifiers is essential before applying for NBA accreditation. The duration of accreditation has also been revised to 3 years provisional and 6 years full accreditation.
The National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) was launched in 2015 by the Ministry of Human Resource Development to rank institutions in India across various criteria. These criteria include teaching, learning and resources, research and professional practices, graduation outcomes, outreach and inclusivity, and perception. The NIRF rankings are released annually, with the 2021 rankings seeing the Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Indian Institute of Science, and Indian Institute of Technology Bombay ranked as the top three overall. Various discipline-specific rankings are also released annually in areas such as engineering, management, pharmacy, colleges, medicine, law, architecture, and dental.
The National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC) is an autonomous body established by the University Grants Commission of India to assess and accredit higher education institutions in the country. It was established in 1994 to address the deterioration of quality in higher education. NAAC functions through its General Council and Executive Committee, assessing institutions based on criteria like teaching-learning, research, infrastructure, and student support. It grades institutions on a scale of A++ to D to ensure satisfactory quality standards. The aims of NAAC include contributing to national development and promoting excellence in higher education.
The role of the coordinator of the IQAC is crucial in ensuring the effective functioning of all the members. The coordinator of the IQAC may be a senior person with expertise in quality aspects. She/he may be a full-time functionary or, to start with, she/he may be a senior academic /administrator entrusted with the IQAC as an additional responsibility. Secretarial assistance may be facilitated by the administration. It is preferable that the coordinator may have sound knowledge about the computer, its various functions and usage for effective communication.
This document provides a summary of the Academic Performance Indicator (API) scoring system used to evaluate faculty positions with academic grade pay. It outlines the criteria across three categories: (1) teaching, learning, and evaluation activities; (2) co-curricular, extension, and professional development activities; and (3) research and publications. For each category, the document lists the items, maximum scores, and the applicant's self-assessed and verified scores. The API aims to provide a standardized and transparent method for evaluating faculty based on verifiable performance metrics.
This document outlines amendments made by the University Grants Commission to regulations regarding the minimum qualifications for appointment of teachers and other academic staff at universities and colleges.
Key amendments include: requiring selection procedures to incorporate transparent, objective and credible methodologies for analyzing applicant merits; capping the maximum API score claims allowed in various research and publication sub-categories; and revising clauses related to selection committee procedures, Vice Chancellor qualifications, and the API scoring framework.
The amendments are meant to further ensure standards are maintained in higher education faculty recruitment and promotions.
Choice based credit semester system (cbcss)Tiji Thomas
The document discusses the Choice Based Credit Semester System (CBCSS) being implemented in Indian higher education. It notes the need for academic reforms to make students more critical thinkers and problem solvers. The UGC recommends introducing credit-based courses and a credit accumulation system to provide flexibility. CBCS fits with globalization trends and can efficiently utilize technology. Key benefits of CBCS include a shift to learner-centric education and accurately documenting student workload. The document defines terms related to CBCSS and outlines the BCA program structure and grading system under the new framework.
The document provides detailed guidelines for calculating Academic Performance Indicator (API) scores for promotion of teachers under the Career Advancement Scheme, 2010. It outlines the minimum requirements of API scores in different categories for different levels of promotion. Category I covers teaching, learning and evaluation activities. Category II includes co-curricular, extension and professional development activities. Research and academic contributions are assessed under Category III. The API scores are subject to verification by screening or selection committees for approving promotions. The document also includes tables to help calculate the API scores for activities under each category.
MS Excel based UGC API Form Filled in Complete SetDr. SUBIR MAITRA
The document provides details of an API (Academic Performance Indicator) summary for Dr. Subir Maitra. It includes:
1) API scores for 3 categories - Category I (Teaching, Learning and Evaluation), Category II (Professional Development activities), and Category III (Research and Academic Contributions).
2) Details of teaching hours, examination duties, innovative teaching methods for Category I.
3) Details of student activities, corporate responsibilities, professional development activities for Category II.
4) Details of research publications, books/chapters published, projects undertaken, research guidance for Category III.
5) Total API scores of 114.84 for Category I, 45 for Category II, and
The document provides information about the Internal Quality Assurance Cell (IQAC) of Gautam Buddha Mahila College in Gaya, India. It outlines the following key details:
1. The composition and roles of the IQAC committee, which includes the principal, faculty members, students, parents, and alumni.
2. The vision, mission, goals, and functions of the IQAC which aim to promote quality in teaching, learning, research, extension activities, governance, and innovations.
3. The various mechanisms adopted by the IQAC to ensure quality, including curriculum development, teaching-learning processes, research, community engagement programs, student-centric learning, and best practices.
It is about NAAC criterion3 Research, Innovations and Extension. It describes all key indicators in details with explanation. It is useful for the colleges to improve NAAC grade.
The document outlines the criteria and process for quality assurance and accreditation of higher education institutions in India by the National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC). It discusses the 7 criteria that are assessed, including curricular aspects, teaching-learning and evaluation, research, infrastructure, student support, governance, and innovative practices. Institutions are given an institutional cumulative grade point average (CGPA) on a scale of 1 to 4 based on their performance across the 7 criteria to determine their accreditation level.
NAAC Presentation - Dr HK Garg, Sarojini Naidu Govt Girls College BhopalPROFESSOR Dr. H.K. Garg
This presentation is an overview of all necessary facts & figures pertaining to our College for assessment and accreditation. It is not a more plethora of achievements; rather, it is revelation of a path we have adhered to. Let us invite you to reel through the pages and be a part of our legacy.
Prof HK Garg, Coordinator IQAC & NAAC Steering Committee.
Principal presentation for NAAC on 22-23 March ,2021.Dr. Neha Rani
Government College Narnaund (Hisar) welcomed the NAAC peer team for their accreditation visit on March 22-23, 2021. The college was established in 2013 and is affiliated with Guru Jambheshwar University of Science and Technology Hisar. It offers undergraduate programs across 16 departments and has a student body of over 800. The college aims to provide quality education to rural students while developing critical thinking and social responsibility.
An all-inclusive procedure of Assessment & Accreditation of Higher Education Institutions, including Universities, Autonomous, Affiliated and Constituent Colleges (all Government institutions, Grant-in-aid colleges or Self-financed institutes) in India.
It explains step wise process of Registration, Online submission of IIQA (Institutional Information for Quality Assessment); SSR (Self-Study Report); DVV (Data Validation and Verification); SSS (Student Satisfaction Survey); PTV (Peer Team Visit); and Institutional Grading.
The document summarizes the academic audit process used by the Tennessee Board of Regents to promote continuous quality improvement at institutions. The process involves a self-study where institutions evaluate their performance across focal areas like learning objectives and teaching. Auditors then visit to provide feedback and recommendations. Institutions then implement initiatives to address areas for growth. The goal is to use the recurrent audit process to demonstrate effectiveness and improve teaching and learning over time.
Professor/
Professor/
Professor
Professor
Equivalent
Equivalent
(Stage 4) to
(Stage 5) to
caderies
(Stage 1 to
(Stage 2)
Professor
Professor
Stage 2)
(Stage 3)
(Stage 4)
(Stage 5)
I Teaching-learning, Evaluation Related Activities (Category - I)
75 / Year
75 / Year
75 / Year
75 / Year
II Co-Curricular, Extension and Profession related activities (Category II)
15 / Year
15 / Year
15
The document discusses the National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC) of India. It provides the following key points:
- NAAC was established in 1994 by the University Grants Commission to assess and accredit institutions of higher education in India.
- NAAC accreditation ensures quality standards in higher education by assessing institutions based on criteria like curricular aspects, teaching-learning and evaluation, research and infrastructure.
- The assessment results in an overall grade for the institution on a scale of A++ to C. Key indicators include curricular planning, teacher quality, research publications, facilities, student support and governance.
Naac presentation education department - central university of keralaThiyagu K
This power-point was prepared for the purpose of NAAC Peer team visit to our Department of Education, Central University of Kerala on 25th October 2016. It is my pleasure to share our department profile power-point in this social platform...
The criteria based assessment forms the backbone of A&A process of NAAC. The seven criteria represent the core functions and activities of a HEI. In the revised framework not only the academic and administrative aspects of institutional functioning but also the emerging issues have been included. The seven Criteria to serve as basis for assessment of HEIs are:
2. Teaching-Learning and Evaluation
3. Research, Innovations and Extension
4. Infrastructure and Learning Resources
5. Student Support and Progression
6. Governance, Leadership and Management
7. Institutional Values and Best Practices
Under each Criterion a few Key Indicators are identified. These Key Indicators (KIs) are further delineated as Metrics which actually elicit responses from the HEIs. These seven criteria along with their KIs are given below explicating the aspects they represent.
My Presentation as Principal of VAMCC ,before NAAC TEAM - Sunil Sharma
VAMCC apply for 2nd cycle to NAAC for its gradation. The team arrived for visit as per schedule. on 8th April-2015 , the proceeding kicked off with my PPT presentation. Here I am uploading the same to guide others
Nba & pre qualifier for accreditationmrinalmanik64
The document discusses the details of pre-qualifiers for NBA accreditation. It explains that NBA accreditation is a process that ensures quality in higher education. It operates on a two-tier system for autonomous and non-autonomous institutions. Pre-qualifiers include basic institution details, program information, faculty and student details, and criteria like student intake percentages and faculty-student ratios. Meeting these pre-qualifiers is essential before applying for NBA accreditation. The duration of accreditation has also been revised to 3 years provisional and 6 years full accreditation.
The National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) was launched in 2015 by the Ministry of Human Resource Development to rank institutions in India across various criteria. These criteria include teaching, learning and resources, research and professional practices, graduation outcomes, outreach and inclusivity, and perception. The NIRF rankings are released annually, with the 2021 rankings seeing the Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Indian Institute of Science, and Indian Institute of Technology Bombay ranked as the top three overall. Various discipline-specific rankings are also released annually in areas such as engineering, management, pharmacy, colleges, medicine, law, architecture, and dental.
The National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC) is an autonomous body established by the University Grants Commission of India to assess and accredit higher education institutions in the country. It was established in 1994 to address the deterioration of quality in higher education. NAAC functions through its General Council and Executive Committee, assessing institutions based on criteria like teaching-learning, research, infrastructure, and student support. It grades institutions on a scale of A++ to D to ensure satisfactory quality standards. The aims of NAAC include contributing to national development and promoting excellence in higher education.
The role of the coordinator of the IQAC is crucial in ensuring the effective functioning of all the members. The coordinator of the IQAC may be a senior person with expertise in quality aspects. She/he may be a full-time functionary or, to start with, she/he may be a senior academic /administrator entrusted with the IQAC as an additional responsibility. Secretarial assistance may be facilitated by the administration. It is preferable that the coordinator may have sound knowledge about the computer, its various functions and usage for effective communication.
This document provides a summary of the Academic Performance Indicator (API) scoring system used to evaluate faculty positions with academic grade pay. It outlines the criteria across three categories: (1) teaching, learning, and evaluation activities; (2) co-curricular, extension, and professional development activities; and (3) research and publications. For each category, the document lists the items, maximum scores, and the applicant's self-assessed and verified scores. The API aims to provide a standardized and transparent method for evaluating faculty based on verifiable performance metrics.
This document outlines amendments made by the University Grants Commission to regulations regarding the minimum qualifications for appointment of teachers and other academic staff at universities and colleges.
Key amendments include: requiring selection procedures to incorporate transparent, objective and credible methodologies for analyzing applicant merits; capping the maximum API score claims allowed in various research and publication sub-categories; and revising clauses related to selection committee procedures, Vice Chancellor qualifications, and the API scoring framework.
The amendments are meant to further ensure standards are maintained in higher education faculty recruitment and promotions.
Choice based credit semester system (cbcss)Tiji Thomas
The document discusses the Choice Based Credit Semester System (CBCSS) being implemented in Indian higher education. It notes the need for academic reforms to make students more critical thinkers and problem solvers. The UGC recommends introducing credit-based courses and a credit accumulation system to provide flexibility. CBCS fits with globalization trends and can efficiently utilize technology. Key benefits of CBCS include a shift to learner-centric education and accurately documenting student workload. The document defines terms related to CBCSS and outlines the BCA program structure and grading system under the new framework.
The document provides detailed guidelines for calculating Academic Performance Indicator (API) scores for promotion of teachers under the Career Advancement Scheme, 2010. It outlines the minimum requirements of API scores in different categories for different levels of promotion. Category I covers teaching, learning and evaluation activities. Category II includes co-curricular, extension and professional development activities. Research and academic contributions are assessed under Category III. The API scores are subject to verification by screening or selection committees for approving promotions. The document also includes tables to help calculate the API scores for activities under each category.
MS Excel based UGC API Form Filled in Complete SetDr. SUBIR MAITRA
The document provides details of an API (Academic Performance Indicator) summary for Dr. Subir Maitra. It includes:
1) API scores for 3 categories - Category I (Teaching, Learning and Evaluation), Category II (Professional Development activities), and Category III (Research and Academic Contributions).
2) Details of teaching hours, examination duties, innovative teaching methods for Category I.
3) Details of student activities, corporate responsibilities, professional development activities for Category II.
4) Details of research publications, books/chapters published, projects undertaken, research guidance for Category III.
5) Total API scores of 114.84 for Category I, 45 for Category II, and
Professor in Stage 1
completing three years of service
shall be eligible, subject to meeting
the API Scores and selection
criteria, to move to Stage 2.
are with M.Phil/PG
Degree in Professional
Courses such as LLM,
M.Tech, M.V.Sc.,
M.D., or six years of
service who are
without Ph.D/M.Phil/
PG Degree in
Professional Courses.
(a) Minimum cumulative API scores
using PBAS scoring proforma
developed by the UGC as per the
norms provided in Table II (A).
(b) One Orientation and one
Refresher/Research
many new initiatives have been taken by aicte to improve the quality of technical education India. These initiatives includes model curriculum, induction program for students, internship policy, examination reforms, mandatory internship, industry institute cells in every college, mandatory accreditation, perspective plan for technical education etc.
The document outlines the criteria and information required for National Board of Accreditation (NBA) evaluation of engineering programs. It includes 10 criteria covering areas like vision and mission, curriculum, outcomes, faculty, facilities, governance and more. Institutions must provide details on these criteria in 3 parts - institutional information, departmental information, and program-specific information. They must also declare that the information provided is correct. The NBA will evaluate programs based on these criteria to determine accreditation.
The document provides information on the format and process for self-assessment reports (SAR) submitted to the National Board of Accreditation (NBA) for undergraduate engineering programs. It outlines the SAR format, including sections on institutional information, program-specific details, criteria and weightages. The criteria include vision, mission and objectives, curriculum, outcomes, student performance, faculty, facilities, and continuous improvement. The document also provides examples of program outcomes and criteria summaries to guide institutions in completing the SAR correctly.
Indore-PPT-4-Tier II SAR-CRM-8-06-2018.pptxssuser226fc4
The document provides information on the format and guidelines for preparing a Self Assessment Report (SAR) for undergraduate engineering programs seeking accreditation from the National Board of Accreditation (NBA). It discusses the SAR format, including sections on institutional information, program-specific details, criteria for assessment, and guidelines. The key points are:
1) The SAR forms the basis for the accreditation process and is prepared by the institute applying for accreditation.
2) It requires information on the institute, programs, criteria and processes to be assessed. The criteria cover aspects like vision, curriculum, outcomes, faculty, facilities and continuous improvement.
3) Correlation matrices are used to establish linkages between
The document provides information on the format and process for the Self Assessment Report (SAR) submitted to the National Board of Accreditation (NBA) by undergraduate engineering programs for accreditation. It outlines the SAR format, including institutional information, program-specific details, criteria and weightages. The criteria cover areas like vision, mission and objectives, curriculum, outcomes, faculty, facilities, and continuous improvement. The document also provides an annexure listing sample program outcomes and explains the accreditation process involves a two-day visit by peer evaluators and an exit meeting to finalize the accreditation report.
The document proposes new guidelines for the Performance Based Appraisal System (PBAS) under the Career Advancement Scheme (CAS) for university teachers and librarians. Key aspects include:
1) Steps for the new CAS via PBAS including completion of format, eligibility checks, approvals from principal, GB meeting and nomination process.
2) Eligibility criteria for stages 1-2, 2-3, and 3-4 including years of service and required Research Council (RC) or equivalent.
3) Scoring mechanisms and requirements across three categories - teaching activities, involvement in university activities, and research/academic contributions. Points are allocated for various activities on a yearly basis
The Annual Quality Assurance Report (AQAR) of the IQAC provides details on the activities of the Internal Quality Assurance Cell (IQAC) of an institution. It details the tangible results achieved in key areas identified by the IQAC at the beginning of the academic year. The AQAR also details the results of the perspective plan worked out by the IQAC. It includes information like number of programs offered, faculty and students details, research publications, funds received, activities conducted, feedback analysis, and plans for the next academic year.
The document summarizes an outcome-based education workshop for second year students on structured choice-based credit systems. It discusses what outcome-based education (OBE) is, why institutions need to follow OBE, components of the structured choice-based credit system, how OBE will be measured using program educational objectives, program outcomes, program specific outcomes and course outcomes. It also outlines specializations and mandatory value-added courses students can take.
This PPT is presented at One-Day State Level Seminar on "NAAC Assessment and Accreditation Process in Affiliated Colleges" organized by IQAC, Asannagar MMT College, Nadia in collaboration with Nabadwip Vidyasagar College, Nadia on 15th July, 2023
This document provides guidelines for final year B.E. project activities and use of the Project Mentoring and Monitoring System (PMMS) platform at Gujarat Technological University. It outlines the objectives of PMMS to help students with project mentoring and monitoring. It describes the various activities students must complete on PMMS, including registering their projects, submitting periodic progress reports, design exercises, patent reports, and uploading their final project reports. The document provides timelines and instructions for using PMMS for activities in the 7th and 8th semesters. It also describes how the system facilitates mentoring of student projects by industry experts through the platform.
This document provides guidelines for final year B.E. project activities and use of the Project Mentoring and Monitoring System (PMMS) platform at Gujarat Technological University. It outlines the objectives of PMMS, which are to help students get appropriate mentoring and guidance for their projects and work systematically. PMMS allows students to update progress, and guides, mentors, HODs and principals to provide feedback. It covers registration, team formation, progress reports, design exercises, business plans, patent drafting, and other final project submission activities. The document provides timelines, instructions and resources to help students, guides and others effectively use PMMS to support final year projects.
The document outlines the assessment methodology for internships that are mandatory for all students in Andhra Pradesh as part of the revised curriculum. It details the learning outcomes and evaluation process for three internships: 1) A community service project after the first year, 2) An apprenticeship/internship after the second year, and 3) A semester-long apprenticeship during the fifth/sixth semester. For each internship, students are evaluated based on a project log, implementation, report, and presentation. Marks are converted to letter grades that factor into students' GPAs. The final internship involves both internal and external assessment including employer feedback.
This document outlines the quality improvement plan of the Development Economics Faculty at Universitas Airlangga in Indonesia. It discusses 6 key areas: 1) internal quality assurance, 2) mission statement, 3) educational programs, 4) students, 5) faculty, and 6) educational infrastructure. For each area, it performs a self-check, identifies issues to improve, and outlines actions to enhance quality. It also discusses the faculty's quality improvement system, processes, and strategies to strengthen its educational programs and research activities through initiatives like workshops, language assistance, and community outreach.
Andreas Mallouppas Developing Qa SystemsYouth Agora
This document discusses developing internal quality assurance (IQA) systems and the role of benchmarks and performance indicators. It notes that IQA systems cannot ignore the requirements of external quality assurance (EQA) and must include EQA demands. Benchmarks define the level of achievement for a given activity, while performance indicators define the required performance to achieve benchmarks. Examples of benchmarks and indicators are provided, such as increasing student intake quality and research output. The document stresses the importance of establishing goals, quantifiable measures, and an organizational culture of transparency and accountability to support effective IQA systems.
The document outlines guidelines from the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) regarding internship policies and procedures for technical education institutions in India. It discusses the importance and benefits of internships for students, institutions, and industries. It provides guidelines on organizing internships, including recommended duration, credit frameworks, roles of training and placement cells, and evaluation procedures. The document aims to enhance the employability of graduates by exposing them to real-world work experiences through internship opportunities.
This document from Gujarat Technological University outlines new mandatory requirements for earning a B.E. degree beginning in the 2015-2016 academic year. Specifically, it requires students to earn a minimum number of activity points through participation in co-curricular and extracurricular activities over the course of their degree program, in addition to fulfilling academic requirements. A table outlines the minimum activity points required based on a student's year of entry. A second table then lists the various approved activities students can participate in to earn these points and the maximum points allocated to each activity depending on its level of participation and recognition.
This document discusses the need for reforms in engineering education in India. It notes that while India produces over 1 million engineering graduates annually, the existing education system focuses too heavily on theory and lacks emphasis on practical skills and employability. It proposes a project-based learning model to address this. Key aspects of this model include integrating hands-on projects into the curriculum from the 2nd semester onwards, industry collaboration, a 45-day student fellowship, and a focus on developing technical and soft skills needed for employment. The goal is to produce job-ready engineers who can also start their own companies and contribute to India's technological development.
ISO/IEC 27001, ISO/IEC 42001, and GDPR: Best Practices for Implementation and...PECB
Denis is a dynamic and results-driven Chief Information Officer (CIO) with a distinguished career spanning information systems analysis and technical project management. With a proven track record of spearheading the design and delivery of cutting-edge Information Management solutions, he has consistently elevated business operations, streamlined reporting functions, and maximized process efficiency.
Certified as an ISO/IEC 27001: Information Security Management Systems (ISMS) Lead Implementer, Data Protection Officer, and Cyber Risks Analyst, Denis brings a heightened focus on data security, privacy, and cyber resilience to every endeavor.
His expertise extends across a diverse spectrum of reporting, database, and web development applications, underpinned by an exceptional grasp of data storage and virtualization technologies. His proficiency in application testing, database administration, and data cleansing ensures seamless execution of complex projects.
What sets Denis apart is his comprehensive understanding of Business and Systems Analysis technologies, honed through involvement in all phases of the Software Development Lifecycle (SDLC). From meticulous requirements gathering to precise analysis, innovative design, rigorous development, thorough testing, and successful implementation, he has consistently delivered exceptional results.
Throughout his career, he has taken on multifaceted roles, from leading technical project management teams to owning solutions that drive operational excellence. His conscientious and proactive approach is unwavering, whether he is working independently or collaboratively within a team. His ability to connect with colleagues on a personal level underscores his commitment to fostering a harmonious and productive workplace environment.
Date: May 29, 2024
Tags: Information Security, ISO/IEC 27001, ISO/IEC 42001, Artificial Intelligence, GDPR
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Find out more about ISO training and certification services
Training: ISO/IEC 27001 Information Security Management System - EN | PECB
ISO/IEC 42001 Artificial Intelligence Management System - EN | PECB
General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) - Training Courses - EN | PECB
Webinars: https://pecb.com/webinars
Article: https://pecb.com/article
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For more information about PECB:
Website: https://pecb.com/
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/pecb/
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/PECBInternational/
Slideshare: http://www.slideshare.net/PECBCERTIFICATION
This document provides an overview of wound healing, its functions, stages, mechanisms, factors affecting it, and complications.
A wound is a break in the integrity of the skin or tissues, which may be associated with disruption of the structure and function.
Healing is the body’s response to injury in an attempt to restore normal structure and functions.
Healing can occur in two ways: Regeneration and Repair
There are 4 phases of wound healing: hemostasis, inflammation, proliferation, and remodeling. This document also describes the mechanism of wound healing. Factors that affect healing include infection, uncontrolled diabetes, poor nutrition, age, anemia, the presence of foreign bodies, etc.
Complications of wound healing like infection, hyperpigmentation of scar, contractures, and keloid formation.
A review of the growth of the Israel Genealogy Research Association Database Collection for the last 12 months. Our collection is now passed the 3 million mark and still growing. See which archives have contributed the most. See the different types of records we have, and which years have had records added. You can also see what we have for the future.
हिंदी वर्णमाला पीपीटी, hindi alphabet PPT presentation, hindi varnamala PPT, Hindi Varnamala pdf, हिंदी स्वर, हिंदी व्यंजन, sikhiye hindi varnmala, dr. mulla adam ali, hindi language and literature, hindi alphabet with drawing, hindi alphabet pdf, hindi varnamala for childrens, hindi language, hindi varnamala practice for kids, https://www.drmullaadamali.com
This presentation was provided by Steph Pollock of The American Psychological Association’s Journals Program, and Damita Snow, of The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), for the initial session of NISO's 2024 Training Series "DEIA in the Scholarly Landscape." Session One: 'Setting Expectations: a DEIA Primer,' was held June 6, 2024.
Strategies for Effective Upskilling is a presentation by Chinwendu Peace in a Your Skill Boost Masterclass organisation by the Excellence Foundation for South Sudan on 08th and 09th June 2024 from 1 PM to 3 PM on each day.
Chapter wise All Notes of First year Basic Civil Engineering.pptxDenish Jangid
Chapter wise All Notes of First year Basic Civil Engineering
Syllabus
Chapter-1
Introduction to objective, scope and outcome the subject
Chapter 2
Introduction: Scope and Specialization of Civil Engineering, Role of civil Engineer in Society, Impact of infrastructural development on economy of country.
Chapter 3
Surveying: Object Principles & Types of Surveying; Site Plans, Plans & Maps; Scales & Unit of different Measurements.
Linear Measurements: Instruments used. Linear Measurement by Tape, Ranging out Survey Lines and overcoming Obstructions; Measurements on sloping ground; Tape corrections, conventional symbols. Angular Measurements: Instruments used; Introduction to Compass Surveying, Bearings and Longitude & Latitude of a Line, Introduction to total station.
Levelling: Instrument used Object of levelling, Methods of levelling in brief, and Contour maps.
Chapter 4
Buildings: Selection of site for Buildings, Layout of Building Plan, Types of buildings, Plinth area, carpet area, floor space index, Introduction to building byelaws, concept of sun light & ventilation. Components of Buildings & their functions, Basic concept of R.C.C., Introduction to types of foundation
Chapter 5
Transportation: Introduction to Transportation Engineering; Traffic and Road Safety: Types and Characteristics of Various Modes of Transportation; Various Road Traffic Signs, Causes of Accidents and Road Safety Measures.
Chapter 6
Environmental Engineering: Environmental Pollution, Environmental Acts and Regulations, Functional Concepts of Ecology, Basics of Species, Biodiversity, Ecosystem, Hydrological Cycle; Chemical Cycles: Carbon, Nitrogen & Phosphorus; Energy Flow in Ecosystems.
Water Pollution: Water Quality standards, Introduction to Treatment & Disposal of Waste Water. Reuse and Saving of Water, Rain Water Harvesting. Solid Waste Management: Classification of Solid Waste, Collection, Transportation and Disposal of Solid. Recycling of Solid Waste: Energy Recovery, Sanitary Landfill, On-Site Sanitation. Air & Noise Pollution: Primary and Secondary air pollutants, Harmful effects of Air Pollution, Control of Air Pollution. . Noise Pollution Harmful Effects of noise pollution, control of noise pollution, Global warming & Climate Change, Ozone depletion, Greenhouse effect
Text Books:
1. Palancharmy, Basic Civil Engineering, McGraw Hill publishers.
2. Satheesh Gopi, Basic Civil Engineering, Pearson Publishers.
3. Ketki Rangwala Dalal, Essentials of Civil Engineering, Charotar Publishing House.
4. BCP, Surveying volume 1
This slide is special for master students (MIBS & MIFB) in UUM. Also useful for readers who are interested in the topic of contemporary Islamic banking.
Main Java[All of the Base Concepts}.docxadhitya5119
This is part 1 of my Java Learning Journey. This Contains Custom methods, classes, constructors, packages, multithreading , try- catch block, finally block and more.
LAND USE LAND COVER AND NDVI OF MIRZAPUR DISTRICT, UPRAHUL
This Dissertation explores the particular circumstances of Mirzapur, a region located in the
core of India. Mirzapur, with its varied terrains and abundant biodiversity, offers an optimal
environment for investigating the changes in vegetation cover dynamics. Our study utilizes
advanced technologies such as GIS (Geographic Information Systems) and Remote sensing to
analyze the transformations that have taken place over the course of a decade.
The complex relationship between human activities and the environment has been the focus
of extensive research and worry. As the global community grapples with swift urbanization,
population expansion, and economic progress, the effects on natural ecosystems are becoming
more evident. A crucial element of this impact is the alteration of vegetation cover, which plays a
significant role in maintaining the ecological equilibrium of our planet.Land serves as the foundation for all human activities and provides the necessary materials for
these activities. As the most crucial natural resource, its utilization by humans results in different
'Land uses,' which are determined by both human activities and the physical characteristics of the
land.
The utilization of land is impacted by human needs and environmental factors. In countries
like India, rapid population growth and the emphasis on extensive resource exploitation can lead
to significant land degradation, adversely affecting the region's land cover.
Therefore, human intervention has significantly influenced land use patterns over many
centuries, evolving its structure over time and space. In the present era, these changes have
accelerated due to factors such as agriculture and urbanization. Information regarding land use and
cover is essential for various planning and management tasks related to the Earth's surface,
providing crucial environmental data for scientific, resource management, policy purposes, and
diverse human activities.
Accurate understanding of land use and cover is imperative for the development planning
of any area. Consequently, a wide range of professionals, including earth system scientists, land
and water managers, and urban planners, are interested in obtaining data on land use and cover
changes, conversion trends, and other related patterns. The spatial dimensions of land use and
cover support policymakers and scientists in making well-informed decisions, as alterations in
these patterns indicate shifts in economic and social conditions. Monitoring such changes with the
help of Advanced technologies like Remote Sensing and Geographic Information Systems is
crucial for coordinated efforts across different administrative levels. Advanced technologies like
Remote Sensing and Geographic Information Systems
9
Changes in vegetation cover refer to variations in the distribution, composition, and overall
structure of plant communities across different temporal and spatial scales. These changes can
occur natural.
LAND USE LAND COVER AND NDVI OF MIRZAPUR DISTRICT, UP
Revised api pbas as per ugc
1. Revised API-PBASFor Recruitments and Promotion Under CAS as per UGC’s 4th Amendment
Dated 11th July, 2016
Dr. Arvind B. Chavhan
IQAC CO-ORDINATOR
Digambarrao Bindu Arts, Commerce & Science College, Bhokar, Dist Nanded
Email: drarvindchavhan@gmail.com | CELL: +91-942 055 7727 | 997 055 9438
Editor-in-Chief
International Research Journal of Science & Engineering
ISSN: 2320-0015 UGC Approved Journal No. 63628
www.irjse.in | Email: editorirjse@gmail.com
Cell: +91-942 055 7727 | 997 055 9438
Managing Editor
International Journal of Life Sciences
UGC Approved Journal No. 48951
ISSN: 2320-964X (Online) ISSN: 2320-7817 (Print)
http://www.ijlsci.in | Email: editor@ijlsci.in
Cell: +91-942 055 7727 | 997 055 9438
2. Indicators for Academic Performance,
Essential for Appointments and For Promotions under CAS.
Six stages Promotion
3. CATEGORY I : TEACHING, LEARNING AND EVALUATION
RELATED ACTIVITIES
CATEGORY II : PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT, CO-
CURRICULAR AND EXTENSION ACTIVITIES
CATEGORY III: RESEARCH AND ACADEMIC CONTRIBUTIONS
.
4. CATEGORY I :
Teaching, Learning and Evaluation Related Activities
CATEGORY I : INDICATORS MAX SCORE MIN. SCORE
a. Direct teaching 70/60/60) 75 %
b. Examination duties 20/20/10
c. Innovative Teaching 10/15/20
Total 100/95/90 80/75/70
5. a) Direct Teaching
No score should be assigned if a teacher has taken less
than 75 % of the assigned classes. Proportionate score
may be given for 75% and above performance.
Universities/Colleges may give allowance for periods of
leave where alternative teaching arrangements have been
made.
Maximum score of 70 if there is
100 % performance.
(Score 70/60/60) (525/465/465)
Actual hrs spent per academic year ÷ 7.5/7.75/7.75
Max. Score : 70
70 (for 100%)
Below 75% No
Score.
CATEGORY I :
Teaching, Learning and Evaluation Related Activities.
Direct teaching 18/18/16/ hour per week include the Lectures/Seminars/
Practical's / Tutorials/ Contact classes taken should be based on verifiable
records.
a) Direct Teaching b) Examination Duties c) Innovative Teaching-
6. a. i. Classroom teaching lectures, seminar
(As per allocation)
Sr.
No.
Course/
Paper
Level Mode of
Teaching*
No. of periods /
Hours allotted
No. of
periods
/Hours
engaged
per annum
Actual Score
(Actual hours
spent per
academic year
7.5/7.75/7.75)
Per
Week
Per
Annum
* Lecture (L), Seminar (S)
a. ii. Classroom teaching (including lectures, seminar) in
excess of UGC norms (as per allocation)
Sr.
No.
Course/
Paper
Level Mode of
Teaching*
Hours/ periods
engaged
per annum
Actual Score (Actual
hours spent per
academic year
7.5/7.75/7.75)
* Lecture (L), Seminar (S)
7. a. iii. Tutorials and Practicals, Field work, Project Supervision
(Actual as per student attendance register)
Sr.
No
.
Course /
Paper
Tutorials/ Practical/
Field work/ Project
supervision
Hours/ Periods
per academic year
engaged
Hours/ Periods
per academic year
engaged
Sub Total a. Direct Teaching Max. Score 70/60 Actual Score – a i+ii+iii =
8. b. Examination Duties
Sr.
No.
Type of Duties Dates
from –
to
Actual
Hours
spent
Max. Score 20/20/10
(Actual hrs spent per
academic year ÷ 10)
1 Question paper setting,
2 Invigilation/supervision
3 Flying squad
4 Custodian/C.S./A.C.S
5 CAP Director/Assitt
Director
6 Unfair menace committee
7 Internal assessment
8 External assessment
9 Re evaluation
Total Actual Score
Maximum Score 20, for Assistant Professor & Associate Professor and 10 for Professor.
9. c. Innovative Teaching-
Sr.
No
Nature of Activity Actual
hours
spent per
academic
year
Actual Score
(Actual hours
spent per
academic year
10)
• Learning Methodologies
• Use of innovative methodologies for teaching
• Use of ICT
• Updating of subject content
• Course improvement
• Preparation of study material
• Interaction with entrepreneur / social worker
• Mentoring
• Participative teaching
• Role playing
Sub total (max score 10/15/20)
Maximum Score 10 for Assistant Professor, 15 for Associate Professor, 20 for Professor.
10. Summary of Category I :
CATEOGRY INDICATORS MAX SCORE MIN. SCORE
CATEGORY I : a. Direct teaching 70/60/60) 75 %
b. Examination duties 20/20/10
c. Innovative Teaching 10/15/20
Total 100/95/90 80/75/70
Note : * Assistant Professor Stage 1 to 2 = 80, Stage 2 to 3 = 80,
Assistant Professor to Associate Professor Stage 3 to 4 = 75,
Associate Professor to Professor Stage 4 to 5 = 70
Professor Stage 5 to 6 = 70
11. CATEGORY II : PROFESSIONAL
DEVELOPMENT, CO-CURRICULAR AND
EXTENSION ACTIVITIES
Nature of Activity Max
API
Score
Actual
score
a) Student related co-curricular, extension and field based
activities
20 Actual
hours
spent
per
academi
c year ÷
10
b) Contribution to Corporate life and management of the
sports units and institution through participation in sports
and administrative committees and responsibilities
(including as Principal / Director / Convener / similar
other duties that require regular office hrs for its
discharge)
15
c) Professional Development activities (such as participation
in seminars, conferences, short term training courses,
camps & events, talks, lectures in refresher / faculty
development courses, membership of associations,
dissemination and general articles and any other
contribution)
15
12. CATEGORY II :
a) Student related co-curricular, extension and field based activities.
Max. Aggregate Limit 20
Catego
ry II a)
Nature of Activity Max
API
Score
Actual
score
i. Discipline related co- curricular activities
organized
Field work, field studies study tour
Student seminar
Remedial classes
Career counseling
NET/SET/GETT/Workshop (1 week)
Quiz, debate, elocution, (on subject )
Essay competition on subject
Exhibition
Subject / faculty day celebration
Survey conduction
Subject association activity
(Evidence to be provided.)
10 Actual
hours spent
per
academic
year ÷ 10
13. Catego
ry II a)
Nature of Activity Max
API
Score
Actual
score
ii. Other co-curricular activities
Cultural prog. coordinator
NSS, NCC officer/ Assit officer
Eradication of superstitions
Tree plantation
AIDS / Awareness
Blood donation camp
Student welfare officer
Placement officer
Sports Committee
(Evidence to be provided.)
10 Actual
hours spent
per
academic
year ÷ 10
CATEGORY II :
a) Student related co-curricular, extension and field based activities.
Max. Aggregate Limit 20
14. Categ
ory II
a)
Nature of Activity Max
API
Score
Actual
score
iii. Extension and dissemination activities
Positions held / Leadership role played in
organization linked with Extension work
Community work such as—National integration,
human Right, peace, Scientific temper flood/
drought relief
Public lectures delivered (Related to subject)
Talks delivered in a programme as chief guest
Seminars in public interest
General awareness activities
Organizing subject related event like lecturer on
special topics
Popular writings not covered under( III)
(Evidence to be provided.)
10 Actual
hours spent
per
academic
year ÷ 10
CATEGORY II :
a) Student related co-curricular, extension and field based activities.
Max. Aggregate Limit 20
15. Categ
ory II
b)
Nature of Activity Max
API
Score
Actual
score
i. Administrative responsibility
Dean, Principal, management council member
Director of school/institute
IQAC coordinator,
Refresher/orientation coordinator
Head of Department
Chairperson/ Convener
Teacher-in-charge or similar duties that require
regular office hours for its discharge) per duty
10 Actual
hours spent
per
academic
year ÷ 10
CATEGORY II :
b) Contribution to corporate life and management of the department
and institution through participation in academic and administrative
Committees and responsibilities. Max. Aggregate Limit 15
16. Categ
ory II
b)
Nature of Activity Max
API
Score
Actual
score
ii. Participation in
BOS/ Faculty / Academic Council /Senate/ any other
University Committee / Chairman for subject related event
like. Ph.D. Open Defense Session/ Various Scrutiny meeting
Resource Person/ Speaker for subject related event
Referee/ Judge for subject related event etc.
Administrative Committees
Editorial Board
College Development Committee (CDC)
Admission committee
Campus development
Library committee
Standing Committee
Sexual Harassment & Prevention Committee etc.
Membership / participation in State /Central bodies/
committees on education research
Exam reforms
10 Actual
hours
spent
per
academ
ic year
÷ 10
CATEGORY II :
b) Contribution to corporate life and management of the department
and institution through participation in academic and administrative
Committees and responsibilities. Max. Aggregate Limit 15
17. CATEGORY II :
c. Professional Development activities
Max. Aggregate Limit 15
Categ
ory II
Nature of Activity Max
API
Score
Actual
score
c Participation in seminars, conferences,
Short term training courses,
Industrial experience,
Talks,
Lectures in refresher / faculty development courses,
Dissemination and general articles and any other
contribution
Publication of Articles in proceedings/ newspaper
(on subject) Magazines not covered in CATGEORY
III
Membership of Association
(International/ National/ State)
15 Actual
hours
spent
per
academ
ic year
÷ 10
18. Total of Category II :
CATEOGRY INDICATORS MAX SCORE
CATEGORY I : a. 20
b. 15
c. 15
Total 50
Minimum API Score Required for Cat. II / assessment period 50/50/
50/50/100*
* Stage 1 to 2 = 50, Stage 2 to 3 = 50, Stage 3 to 4 = 50,
Stage 4 to 5 = 50, Stage 5 to 6 = 100
* Teachers may score the balance of points from either Category II or
Category III to achieve the minimum score required under Category II + III.
VERIFIABLE CRITERIA:1) Academic Dairy, 2) Bio Metric Generated Slips. 3)
Attendance sheets, 4) Certification by HOD / Principal, 5) Supporting Documents
19. CATEGORY-III:
RESEARCH AND ACADEMIC CONTRIBUTIONS
Category Activity
III (A) Research Papers published
III(B) Publications other than journal Articles
(books, chapters in books)
III (C) RESEARCH PROJECTS
III (D) RESEARCH GUIDANCE
III (E) Fellowships, Awards and Invited lectures
delivered in conferences / seminars
III (F) Development of e-learning delivery
process/material
20. III (A) Research and Publications
For Faculties of Sciences Faculties of Languages, Arts/
Humanities/ Social Sciences/
Library/ Physical education/
Management
API score
allotted
Refereed Journals as notified by
the UGC#
Refereed Journals as notified by
the UGC#
25 /Publication
Articles in refereed journals with
impact factor below 1.0 / Index
Journal
Articles in refereed journals with
impact factor below 1.0 / Index
Journal
30/ publication
Refereed Journals* with impact
factor 1.0 and below 2.0
Refereed Journals* which are
indexed (impact factor >1)
35 / publication
Refereed Journals* with impact
factor 2.1 and below 5.0
Refereed Journals* with impact
factor 1.0 and below 2.0
40/ publication
Refereed Journals* with impact
factor 5.1 and below 10
Refereed Journals* with impact
factor 2.0 and below 5.0
45/publication
Refereed Journals* with impact
factor above 10
Refereed Journals* with impact
factor above 10
50/publication
Other Reputed Journals as
notified by the UGC#
Other Reputed Journals as
notified by the UGC#
10 / publication
21. * Wherever relevant to any specific discipline, the API score for
paper in refereed journal would be augmented as follows:
The API for joint publications shall be calculated in the following manner:
Of the total score for the relevant category of publication by the concerned
teacher, the First and Principal / corresponding author /supervisor / mentor
would share equally 70% of the total points and the remaining 30% would be
shared equally by all other authors.
(i) paper with impact factor less than 1 - by 5 points; (ii) papers with
impact factor between 1 and 2 by 10 points;
(iii) papers with impact factor between 2 and 5 by 15 points;
(iv) papers with impact factor between 5 and 10 by 20 points:
(v) papers with impact factor above 10 by 25 points.
III (A) Research and Publications
22. III (B) Research Publications (books, chapters in
books, other than refereed journal articles)
For Faculties of Sciences API score
allotted
Text/Reference, Books published by International Publishers, with
ISBN/ISSN number as approved by the University and posted on its
website. The List will be intimated to UGC.
30 per Book for
Single Author
Subject Books, published by National level publishers, with ISBN/ISSN
number or State / Central Govt. Publications as approved by the
University and posted on its website. The List will be intimated to UGC.
20 per Book for
Single Author
Subject Books, published by Other local publishers, with ISBN/ISSN
number as approved by the University and posted on its website. The List
will be intimated to UGC.
15 per Book for
Single Author
Chapters in Books, published by National and International level
publishers, with ISBN/ISSN number as approved by the University and
posted on its website. The List will be intimated to UGC.
International –
10 per Chapter
National – 5 per
Chapter
23. For Faculties of Sciences Faculties of Languages, Arts/
Humanities/ Social Sciences/
Library/ Physical education/
API score
allotted
i. Sponsored
Projects
(a) Major Projects amount
mobilized with grants above
30.0 lakhs
(a) Major Projects amount
mobilized with grants above
5.0 lakhs
20/ each
Project
(b) Major Projects amount
mobilized with grants above
5.0 lakhs up to 30.00 lakhs
(b) Major Projects Amount
mobilized with minimum of
Rs. 3.00 lakhs up to Rs 5.00
lakhs
15 / each
Project
c) Minor Projects (Amount
mobilized with grants above
Rs. 50,000 up to Rs. 5 lakh)
c) Minor Projects (Amount
mobilized With grants above
Rs 25,000 up to Rs. 3 lakh)
10 / each
Project
ii. Consultancy
Projects
Amount mobilized with a
minimum of Rs.10 lakhs
Amount mobilized with a
minimum of Rs. 2 lakhs
10 for
every Rs.10
lakhs and
Rs.2 lakhs,
III. (C) Research Project
24. For Faculties
of Sciences
Faculties of Languages, Arts/
Humanities/ Social Sciences/
Library/ Physical education/
API score
allotted
iii. Projects
outcome /
output
Patent /
Technology
transfer /
Product /
Process
Major Policy document
prepared for international
bodies like WHO /UNO
/UNESCO /UNICEF etc.
Central / State Govt./
Local Bodies
30 for each International /
20 for each national level
output or patent.
Major policy document of
International bodies - 30
Central Government –20,
State Govt.-10
Local bodies – 5
III. (C) Research Project
25. Research Degree Status API ALLOTED
Ph. D. Degree awarded 15 / each candidate
Thesis submitted 10 / each Candidate
M. Phil Degree awarded only 5 / each candidate
III. (D) RESEARCH GUIDANCE
26. III (E) Fellowships, Awards and Invited lectures
delivered in conferences / seminars
Level API ALLOTED
Fellowship
s / Awards
International Award/ Fellowship from
academic Bodies
15 per Award /
15 per Fellowship
National Award / Fellowship from
academic Bodies
10 per Award /
10 per Fellowship
State/University level Award from
academic bodies / Associations
5 Per Award
Invited
lectures /
Papers
presented
International 7 per lecture /
5 per paper presented
National level 5 per lecture /
3 per paper presented
State / University level 3 per lecture /
2 per paper presented
The score under this sub-category shall be restricted to 20% of the minimum
fixed for Category III for any assessment period
28. APPENDIX - III TABLE - II (A) : MINIMUM APIS AS TO BE APPLIED
FOR THE PROMOTION OF TEACHERS UNDER CAREER
ADVANCEMENT SCHEME (CAS) IN UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENTS
AND COLLEGES, AND WEIGHTAGES FOR EXPERT ASSESSMENT
Level Teaching
learning,
Evaluation
Related
Activities
Category -I
Professional
Development
and Extension
activities
Category -II
Research and
Academic
Contributions
Category -III
Min. total
API Score
under
Categories II
and III*
Assist. Prof. /
Equivalent
cadres: (Stage 1 to
Stage 2)
80/Year 50/
Assessment
period
20 /
Assessment
period
90 /
Assessment
period
Assist. Prof. /
Equivalent
cadres: (Stage 2 to
Stage 3)
80/Year 50/
Assessment
period
50 /
Assessment
period
120 /
Assessment
period
* Teachers may score the balance of points from either Category II or Category III to
achieve the minimum score required under Category II + III.
29. Level Teaching
learning,
Evaluation
Related
Activities
Category -I
Professional
Development
and Extension
activities
Category -II
Research and
Academic
Contributions
Category -III
Min. total
API Score
under
Categories II
and III*
Assistant Professor
(Stage 3) to Assoc.
Professor/
equivalent cadres
(Stage 4)
75/year 50 /
Assessment
period
75 /
Assessment
period
150 /
Assessment
period
Associate Professor
(Stage 4) to
Professor
/equivalent cadres
(Stage 5)
70/year 50 /
Assessment
period
100 /
Assessment
period
180 /
Assessment
period
Professor (Stage 5)
to Professor (Stage
6)
70/year 100 /
Assessment
period
400 /
Assessment
period
600 /
Assessment
period
* Teachers may score the balance of points from either Category II or Category III to
achieve the minimum score required under Category II + III.
30. REFERENCES
UGC (Minimum Qualifications for Appointment of Teachers and
other Academic Staff in Universities and Colleges and Measures
for the Maintenance of Standards in Higher Education) (4th
Amendment), Regulations, 2016. 11th July, 2016.
Revised Consolidated API-PBAS for career advancement scheme
(CAS) promotions of university / college teachers as per UGC 4th
amendment dated 11th July 2016 and Govt of Maharashtra GR no
201610051453597208 dated 04th march 2017 onwards. SRTMU,
Nanded
31. Our UGC Approved Journal
Print ISSN : 2320-7817 | Online ISSN:2320-964X
UGC Approved Journal No. 48951
Index Copernicus CV 2015: 59.28
Cosmos Impact Factor 4.369 |
SJIF Impact Factor 4.23
Type: Quarterly
(Published in Mar, June, September, & December)
http://www.ijlsci.in
Email: editor@ijlsci.in | editorijlsci@gmail.com
Cell: +91-942 055 7727 | 997 055 9438
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LIFE SCIENCES
An International Peer Reviewed Refereed Open Access Journal
Indexed in
32. ISSN:2322-0015
UGC Approved Journal No. 63628
Editor in Chief: Dr. Arvind Chavhan
Type: Bimonthly
(Published in Feb, April, June, August, October & December)
http://www.irjse.in
Email: editorirjse@gmail.com
Cell: +91-942 055 7727 | 997 055 9438
INTERNATIONAL RESEARCH JOURNAL OF SCIENCE & ENGINEERING
An International Peer Reviewed Refereed bimonthly Open Access Journal
|IRJSE
Our UGC Approved Journal
Indexed in
33. Thank You !
International Research Journal of Science & Engineering
ISSN: 2320-0015 UGC Approved Journal No. 63628
International Journal of Life Sciences
UGC Approved Journal No. 48951
ISSN: 2320-964X (Online) ISSN: 2320-7817 (Print)