|
Archives
May 16-31, 2000
Committee
calls for revisions in scientific career system guidelines
by Mary Charlotte O. Fresco
Barely a year after the reorganization
of the DA-Scientific Career Evaluation Committee (SCEC),
several moves have been made by the new members to develop
a more defined Scientific Career System (SCS) guideline
on recognizing qualified scientists in public service.
The recently concluded SCEC meeting, held
at the BAR Conference Room, served as venue for the
airing of ideas and recommendations on the rankng system
currently used to screen and evaluate qualified DA Scientists.
The merit system established by the SCEC seeks to promote
equal opportunities for career advancement of scientists,
which inclue promotion in rank and increase in salary.
The system is open to scientific personnel or those
who directly participate in S&T activities and are
occupying scientific research specialist positions and
other comparable positions in an institution or unit.
They hold masteral and doctorate degrees in the disciplines
determined by the Scientfic Career Council (SCC).
BAR Director Eliseo Ponce, who also acts
as thechairman of the Committee, raised some issues
on the rating system used in ranking nominees based
on education and scientific productivity. Scientific
productivity refers to a scientist's creative work -
its application and contribution to the field in the
form of research findings, inventions and discoveries.
The members of the committee, who are
also proponents of various R&D institutions, agreed
that there is a need to create a more defined points
system to avoid the duplication of credit given to an
idea or project. A maximum of 70 points is given for
a scientist's scientific productivity, 15 points for
the teaching experience and 15 points for professional
standing, including awards and citations received. Multiple
points may be given for the reaserch development phase.
For example, separate points may be given for the initial
stage of conceptualization, the launching/testing of
teh idea and the actual utilization or application of
idea.
Dr. Ponce reiterated that a distinction
should be made between work that is still in the research
phase and work that is already in utilization by the
applicant's agency or by farmers to avoid duplication
of points. When it comes to scientific publications
like research journal, it is agreed that the scientist
must submit the copy of the journal that includes the
edited or refereed versions, and the names of the editors
to help the SCEC members distinguish an edited or refereed
journal from a non-refereed one.
Another issue raised during the meeting
is te giving of credit to the scientists' winning work
or experiment. Memebrs stressed that credit would only
be given to work that has received awards from the highest
award-giving organization or body. Furthermore, appropriate
points must be given for the sceintist's membership
and position in a scientific organization. The higher
the position, the higher the point.
The SCEC also suggested that aplicant'
credentials be presented in matrix form to track articles
with multiple citations. This will help the committee
assign comments like "no point" or "repeated
citation."
Another suggestion made by the committee
deals on the "career pathing" of the applicant
to further investigate his educational background at
teh time of evaluation. Moreover, several suggestions
were made with regard to the modifications in the "MS
and Ph.D. required number of years" rule. "However,
teh DA must have ... autonomy with regard to applying
this rule," according to teh Chairman of the committee.
Committee members were Dr. santiago Obien
(PhilRice), Dr. Rodel Maghirang and Dr. Rafael Espino
(UPLB), Mr. Rolly Labios (BAR), Dr. Concepcion Lizada
(BAFPS) and Dr. Edwin Acoba (ATI).
Since the adoption of the Scientific Carer
System in 1991, teh System has conferrred 16 appointments
for the ranks as Scientist I, II, III and IV.
May 16-31 2000 Articles: ::
RP,
China forge stronger S&T ties
::
Committee
calls for revisions in scientific career system guidelines
::
Senior
scientists advisory committee holds 1st meeting
::
Guimaras: mango country
::
R&D
jumps into information technology bandwagon
::: More May 2000 articles :::
|
