Faculty Committee for research
The Committee evaluates research proposals funded internally (as statutory activities), assesses research performance of staff etc. The priority is given to research that is WoW oriented.
Please describe the case in detailIn particular please consider (a)Objectives of the intervention; (b) Tools used to achieve the project goals; (c) Methodologies applied;
The Committee evaluates research proposals funded internally (as statutory activities), assesses research performance of staff etc. The priority is given to research that is WoW oriented.
What resources are required for the case?Consider human resources, financial resources, infrastructure, in-kind resources and any other type required.
The functioning of the Committee does not demand any special resources.
What are the enabling factors making this case successful?Consider institutional support, environmental/social/political factors, etc.
Availability of internal resources, transparency of procedures, interest of staff.
Why do you consider this case to be good/best practice?Please consider that a best practice must (a) have a clearly defined objective to increase the connection with the World of Work, (b) address the target groups of the project, (c) be replicable and sustainable, (d) have clearly demonstrated evidence of effectiveness in increasing the connection with the World of Work
This case is an example of bottom-up mechanisms supporting development of research activities, based on academic self-governance (peer evaluation of research performance, faculty support for research related with the World of Work). Availability of such mechanisms is an important stimulating factor for the staff, gives additional motivation to develop applied research and links with external stakeholders.