104年04月15日103學年度第3次教師評審委員會核備

Approved for reference by the 3rd meeting of the Faculty Evaluation Committee on April 15, 2015 for Academic Year 2014

109年10月21日109學年度第1次校務會議通過組織調整

一、國立成功大學產學創新總中心（下稱本中心）依據本校研究人員聘任及升等辦法訂定本要點。

1.     The Researches and Services Headquarters of National Cheng Kung University (“the Headquarters”) establishes these Directions in accordance with the University’s Researcher Employment and Promotion Regulations.

二、本中心編制內專任研究人員，均應依本要點接受評量。

       研究員及副研究員每滿五年接受一次評量，助理研究員每滿三年接受一次評量。

       符合下列條件之一，經本中心研究人員評審委員會、非屬學院教師評審委員會確認者，得免接受評量：

(一)獲選為中央研究院院士者。

(二)曾獲頒教育部學術獎或國家講座、本校講座及經本校認可之國內外著名大學講座教授者。

(三)曾獲國際著名學術獎或在學術上有卓越貢獻，經產學創新總中心研究人員評審委員會、非屬學院教師評審委員會認可者。

(四)曾獲頒科技部傑出研究獎三次以上、甲（優）等研究獎或研究主持費共十次以上（一次傑出研究獎相當於三次甲等研究獎）。曾獲選本校「產學特優」奬者，相當於一次傑出研究獎；「產學優良」奬者，相當兩次研究主持費。

(五)年滿六十歲者，但初聘者，不適用之。

(六)曾獲其他研究及服務獎項或其成果具體卓著，經產學創新總中心研究人員評審委員會、非屬學院教師評審委員會認可免接 受評量者。

2.     All full-time researchers of the Headquarters shall be evaluated in accordance with these Directions.

Research fellows and associate research follows are to be evaluated once every five years while assistant research fellows are to be evaluated once every three years.

Those meeting one of the criteria below may be exempted from evaluation if they are confirmed by the Researcher Evaluation Committee of the Headquarters instead of the Academic Faculty Evaluation Committee.

(1)      Elected Member of Academia Sinica.

(2)      Winner of the academic award presented by the Ministry of Education or national chair professor, chair professor at the University, and chair professor at any domestic and international well-known university recognized by the University.

(3)      Winner of internationally famous academic award or with outstanding academic contributions that are recognized by the Researcher Evaluation Committee of the Headquarters and the Evaluation Committee for Non-academic Faculties.

(4)      Winner of Outstanding Research Award of the Ministry of Science and Technology at least three times, Class A (Excellent) Research Award or Research Investigator’s fees for a total of ten times or more (One Outstanding Research Award is equivalent to three Class A Research Awards). The “Excellent Industry” award of the University is equivalent to one Outstanding Research Award. The “Good Industry” award is equivalent to research investigator’s fees twice.

(5)      The above does not apply to those initially employed at the age of 60 years and older.

(6)      Winner of other research and service awards or with substantial outstanding accomplishments that is determined by the Researcher Evaluation Committee of the Headquarters and the Evaluation Committee for Non-academic Faculties to be subject to waiver of the evaluation.

三、研究人員評量須經本中心研究人員評審委員會初審通過後，送非屬學院教師評審委員會複審。

3.     The researcher evaluation includes preliminary review and approval by the Researcher Evaluation Committee of the Headquarters and secondary review by the Evaluation Committee for Non-academic Faculties.

四、研究人員評量應就本次接受評量期間研究及服務績效予以客觀審慎之評量。前述二項比例為(30~70%)，總分為100分；受評人於自評時，自行訂定所佔比例。

研究評量之參考項目如下：

(一)在匿名評審制度之期刊上發表之學術論文。

(二)在非匿名評審制度之期刊上發表之學術論文。

(三)擔任科技部計畫研究主持人或協（共）同主持人。

(四)擔任其他機構團體委託之研究計畫主持人或協（共）同主持人。

(五)學術專書。

(六)收錄於書本章節之論文。

(七)學術會議論文。

(八)其他與研究領域相關之著作。

       服務績效評量參考項目，以校內、外之各項教學、研究等學術性或公共事務性質及產學合作業務之服務為主。

4.     The researcher evaluation shall be objective and cautious and shall cover the research and service performance during the period included in the current evaluation. For the above two items, the ratio is (30~70%) and a full score is 100%. The party being evaluated shall set the ratio independently during self-evaluation.

Reference items to be included in the research evaluation are as follows:

(1)      Academic papers released in a journal with an anonymous review system.

(2)      Academic papers released in a journal with a non-anonymous review system.

(3)      Working as the investigator or sub-/(co-) investigator in a Ministry of Science and Technology project.

(4)      Working as the investigator or sub-/(co-) investigator in a research project authorized by other institutions or organizations.

(5)      Academic publication.

(6)      Papers in a section of a book.

(7)      Paper in an academic meeting.

(8)      Other publications relevant to the field of research.

Reference items in a service performance evaluation shall focus on respective pedagogical or research-based academic or public affairs-related industry-academia services on campus and off campus. 

五、受評人之研究及服務績效，依研究人員評量評分表所訂之標準進行考評，各項分數加總分數達七十五分者，初審通過。

5.    The research and service performance of the party being evaluated is based on the criteria defined in the Researcher Evaluation Rating Scale. When the sum of scores of respective items reaches 75% and above, the party being evaluated passes the preliminary review.

六、新聘研究員及副研究員依本校研究人員聘任及升等辦法第七條規定，通過續聘者，視同通過第一次評量。

       新聘助理研究員依本校研究人員聘任及升等辦法第七條規定，於第4年起接受評量。通過升等時，視同通過第一次評量。

6.     Newly hired research fellows and associate research fellows are considered to have been approved during the first evaluation if their employment is extended as required by Article 7 of the University’s Researcher Employment and Promotion Regulations.

Newly hired research fellows and associate research fellows start to be evaluated in the fourth year of employment as required by Article 7 of the University’s Researcher Employment and Promotion Regulations. When they are promoted, it is considered that they have been approved during the first evaluation.

七、評量不通過者，於次一年起不予晉薪且不得申請休假研究、借調、在外兼職兼課，且應於二年內進行再評量。再評量 通過者，自次年起恢復晉薪，得申請休假研究、借調、在外兼職兼課；未於二年內進行再評量或再評量仍不通過者，則不予續聘。

7.     Those having failed the evaluation are not entitled to a salary raise starting from the year that follows and may not apply for leave of absence in order to devote to research, temporary transfer, working part-time as instructors off campus, and shall be re-evaluated within two years. Those having been approved during re-evaluation are entitled to restoration of a salary raise starting from the year that follows and may apply for leave of absence in order to devote to research, temporary transfer, working part-time as instructors off campus; for those failing to be re-evaluated within two years or remaining disapproved despite revaluation, on the other hand, their employment will not be extended.

八、最近一次評量不通過者，不得提出升等；且不得擔任研究人員評審委員會委員，如為現任委員者，由候補委員遞補之。

8.     Those having been disapproved during the most recent evaluation may not apply for a promotion and may not serve as a member on the Researcher Evaluation Committee; if they are incumbent members, they shall be replaced by those on the waiting list.

九、受評人須提出相關資料接受審查。未提出者，以該年度未通過評量論。但當年度有帶職帶薪或留職停薪情形（如休假研究、借調、出國講學或進修、育嬰、侍親等）不在校致未能提出者，俟返校服務後順延辦理。

9.     The party being evaluated shall provide related materials to be reviewed. Failing to do so, it is considered that he/she did not pass the evaluation for the specific year. Those on paid leave or unpaid leave for the specific year (such as leave to devote to research, temporary transfer, travel to another country as visiting scholar or for continuing education, child care leave, or parent care leave), which results in their inability to provide the said materials, are entitled to a postponement till they return to the University and continue with their service.

十、自本要點通過施行之日起算，任研究員或副研究員滿五年者，接受第一次評量；任助理研究員滿三年者，接受第一次評量。

       應接受評量年數之計算，不包括留職停薪（如出國講學或進修、育嬰、侍親等）及懷孕產假（每次以一年計）期間，但借調期間折半計算。通過升等研究人員，依其升等後職稱，自該學年度起算其應接受評量年數。對應接受評量年數之計算有疑義時，由人事室解釋。

10.    Starting from the date these Directions are promulgated, those having worked as research fellow or associate research fellow for five years and those having worked as assistant research fellow for three years shall be evaluated for first times.

The number of years that requires an evaluation is calculated excluding the duration of paid leave (for being a visiting scholar or pursuing continuing education in another country) and pregnancy or maternity leave (one year at maximum each time) while the duration of temporary transfer shall count as 50%. Promoted researchers shall have their years subject to evaluation calculated starting from the specific academic year when their new job title starts to apply after the promotion. When there is doubt in the calculation of the number of years subject to evaluation, the Personnel Office shall clarify.

十一、研究人員評審委員若為受評人，應迴避與自身評量有關之討論及議決。各次會議之召開均須達三分之二以上委員出席，始得開議；經出席委員過二分之一同意始得決議。

11.     If a member on the Researcher Evaluation Committee is being evaluated, he/she shall be excused for discussions and resolutions regarding their self-evaluation. Each meeting may only take place when attended by more than two-thirds of the members and a decision may only be made when approved by at least one half of the attending members.

十二、受評人應於每年3月1日前將評量資料送交研究人員評審委員會進行初審，研究人員評審委員會應於每年4月15日前完成初審，初審通過後，送非屬學院教師評審委員會辦理複審。

12.     The party being evaluated shall submit rating materials by March 1 each year to the Researcher Evaluation Committee for preliminary review. The Researcher Evaluation Committee shall complete preliminary review by April 15 each year. Once approved during preliminary review, the materials are submitted to the Evaluation Committee for non-academic faculties for secondary review.

十三、初審未通過者，研究人員評審委員會須以書面敘明理由，通知受評人。受評人對初審結果不服者，得向非屬學院教師評審委員會提出書面申復；對複審結果不服者，得向校教師評審委員會提出書面申復。對申復結果不服者，得向校教師申訴評議委員會提出書面申訴。

13.     For those having failed the preliminary review, the Researcher Evaluation Committee shall specify the reasons in writing and notify the party having been evaluated. Upon disagreement on the outcome of preliminary review, the evaluated party may file a written appeal with the Evaluation Committee for non-academic faculties. Upon disagreement on the outcome of secondary review, a written appeal may be filed with the Evaluation Committee for the University’s faculties.  Upon disagreement on the outcome of the appeal, a written complaint may be filed with the Complaint Evaluation Committee for the University’s faculties.

十四、本要點未盡事宜，悉依相關法規辦理。

14.     For matters not covered herein, applicable laws and regulations shall apply.

十五、本要點經研究人員評審委員會通過，提送非屬學院教師評審委員會、轉校教師評審委員會核備後實施，修正時亦同。

15.      These Directions are to be enforced after they are approved by the Researcher Evaluation Committee and then by the Evaluation Committee for non-academic faculties and forwarded to the Evaluation Committee for the University's faculties to be filed for reference; the same shall apply upon revision.