Dear colleagues and teachers of the FMST SUT,
After the recent notice about the changes of the rules for
calculating the personal allowance for our faculty, faculty leadership was
repeatedly asked the disclosure of
specific information and also to clarify some terms used with the
published material in connection with Fund No.2 - Fund for the calculation of
personal allowances relating to the performance of creative employees.
The management of
the faculty is responding to the actual methods for the calculation of the
grants from the Ministry of Education of the Slovak
Republic (ME SR) and at the same time for the conditions from
the commission of the Slovak
Republic's
government via the use of the modified rules. We want to contribute by the use
of these new rules to motive employees and preserve the quality of the
university institution.
The ME evaluated the performance of our
institute only by using a coefficient of 0.3 (methods used by the ME SR for the year 2010 , used a
coefficient of 0.6).
The reason for this is that after these fundamental reforms of the pedagogical process at the faculty in the form of comprehensive accreditation, the total amount for the pedagogical performance at the FMT SUT was nearly the same at all institutes (we have met the requirements of the internal standards to approximately 100 percent and there is no reason to raise them), therefore this criteria started to act as a factor which disproportionately "dragged" the pedagogical performance down to an average. The concept of student/ hours can be expressed as follows:
It is the measurement of hours multiplied by the number of students enrolled in this subject and by the coefficient of the grade of study (from 0.5 for the 1st year of the first grade and 3.0 for the third grade ,under the rules of the ME SR), which creates the total for the subjects provided by the Institute.
2nd criteria - The evaluation of publishing the output was divided into two parts: the first reflects their proportion of the calculation of subsidies, the other reflects the influence on the future of a comprehensive accreditation. It is a relatively difficult problem, because the same publication's output may evaluated differently by the accreditation's commission of the ME SR. As proof for what has been said , a monograph in the Slovak language, issued by a Slovak publisher: for the purposes of calculating the subsidy this output may be compared to the monograph issued in the English language and published abroad, i.e. having a high credit worthiness, the accreditation is an output of type C, i.e. it is useless for the accreditation of the university institutions. This is why we do not include the evaluation of the outcomes of type C and D in our system's second part - the accreditation of publication outputs. The current assessment for the year 2010, the proportion of both components of this criteria is defined by half and the criterion has a relatively high value of 0.4, due to this the faculty promotes publishing in English and abroad. In 2009 each institution committed the same amount of money for the promotion of quality publications and this is also the case in 2010.
The 3rd criteria is very easy to interpret. Under the rules of the ME SR for the calculation of subsidies in accordance with the rules of the Accreditation Commission, we will take into account the funds allocated for scientific and professional , home and foreign projects (not transferable) and also for the contractual projects with industrial partners if they demonstrate a scientific or technical nature.
Finally, I want to make it certain that the current data inputted from 2010 will demonstrate how all of the 1000.00 Euros in the fund will be reallocate to our institutes and also how much money will , on average, revert to one creative worker from each department - see table.
Moravcik Oliver
The Dean.
