The world is advancing so fast and everything is going to be quantified. For example, the human/neurological responses, what we evaluated qualitatively in the past are evaluating quantitively in medical or sensory sciences using various techniques.
Perhaps, this quantification is equally important in other areas of concern. We know that necessity is the mother of invention. It is our choice whether will we be ruled by real academician or just academician in a scientific society. But this decision is crucial, since the future education system of a country depends on this critical decision. We want to listen from proven academician, and we want to see them as decision makers in the academic and scientific community for the betterment of our country.
The recent consequences about PhD studies, PhD holders and providers in Bangladesh enforce to propose an evaluation technique to categorize PhDs. This category can be based on the achievements of the individual during his/her PhD tenure. The achievement can be quantified according to the number of research articles, total impact factors (IF), awards number and host university reputation.
In many cases, the number of research items has close relation with total impact factors, higher the number of published articles, higher the total IF.
On the other hand, an extra benefit can be given to those who have papers with high impact factors. University reputation is also very important in several points such as: 1. Generally, highly reputed universities have more diversified environment and facilities. Hence, higher learning, not limited to only academic learning, can be obtained by the graduates; 2. These universities often not focus on research quantity but research quality.
Many average universities in the world focus on target-based research publications within the defined period and some universities do replication research. Replication means one publication with chicken and another one with quail (everything is similar).
Based on the above points, the total points could be distributed as below:
- Number of published articles in reputed journals (i.e. SCI/SCIE/Scopus): 30%. The points can be distributed with proportional to the number of total articles.
Achievable Points = (Article Numbers/Maximum articles in 10 years slot) x 30.
The maximum articles number could be replaced by fixed numerical value (e.g. 7).
- Total impact factors during PhD tenure: 30%. The points could be assigned with proportion to the total IF.
Achievable Points = (Total IF/Max IF in 10 years slot) x 30.
Maximum IF could be replaced by fixed numerical value (e.g. 20).
- Number of recognized awards awarded for PhD works: 15%. The points could be assigned with proportion to awards numbers.
Achievable Points = (Awards received/Max Awards with 10 years slot) x 15.
- University reputation/ranking: 25%. Twenty five (25) points could be assigned for universities ranked from 1-100, 20 points for 101-500 and 15 points for 500+ ranks.
It is important to divide the time into 10 years (one decade) slot, since the trend in research, publications and IF is significantly changed each decade. Therefore, the time slot could be like 2001 to 2010, 2011-2020, 2021-2030, and so on.
Based on achievements/points, PhDs can be categorized A+, A, B for the points of 80-100, 60-79 and <60 respectively. The point should be noted that this categorization should be subject domain wised (e.g. Engineering, Medical Science, Agriculture, Linguistics etc.) and separated for unpublished thesis.
Unpublished thesis/PhD works should be evaluated based on university reputation (40%), number of core chapters included in the dissertation (40%) and awards (20%), since IF is not applicable here. For a high resolution model, number of conference presentations (International /national scientific society) and award reputation category, PhD study length (years) could be included in the model. This evaluation could provide a quick image of the PhDs reputation before going insight for various purposes.