Suppr超能文献

印度医疗机构中的教师晋升:我们能否改进标准?

Faculty promotions in medical institutions in India: Can we improve the criteria?

作者信息

Dhulkhed Vithal Krishna, Kurdi Madhuri S, Dhulkhed Pavan V, Ramaswamy Ashwini H

机构信息

Department of Anaesthesiology, Krishna Institute of Medical Sciences, Karad, Maharashtra, India.

Department of Anaesthesiology, Karnataka Institute of Medical Sciences, Hubli, India.

出版信息

Indian J Anaesth. 2016 Nov;60(11):796-800. doi: 10.4103/0019-5049.193657.

Abstract

Research publications are desirable for academic promotion in medical colleges as per the current rules of the Medical Council of India (MCI). These rules reflect an endeavour to improve the academic standards. We strongly believe that every medical college teacher should conduct true research and contribute to good peer-reviewed publications. However, it is felt that the MCI rule has the potential to lead to undesirable consequences, and the quality of teaching and learning could take a back-seat. There is an urgent need to adopt more objective criteria and better guidelines as followed by well-known global institutes. In our own country, the University Grants Commission has formulated specific guidelines for this purpose in the form of Academic Performance Indicators which, it appears, are not taken into consideration by the MCI. This article discusses the adverse impact of the rule and suggests ways for the adoption of a more scientific assessment system for faculty appointment and promotion.

摘要

根据印度医学委员会(MCI)的现行规定,研究出版物对于医学院校的学术晋升是必要的。这些规定反映了提高学术水平的努力。我们坚信,每一位医学院教师都应该进行真正的研究,并为优秀的同行评审出版物做出贡献。然而,有人认为MCI的规定有可能导致不良后果,教学质量可能会被置于次要地位。迫切需要采用更客观的标准和知名全球机构所遵循的更好的指导方针。在我们自己的国家,大学资助委员会已经为此制定了具体的指导方针,即学术表现指标,但MCI似乎并未予以考虑。本文讨论了该规定的不利影响,并提出了采用更科学的评估体系进行教师聘任和晋升的方法。

相似文献

1
Faculty promotions in medical institutions in India: Can we improve the criteria?
Indian J Anaesth. 2016 Nov;60(11):796-800. doi: 10.4103/0019-5049.193657.
2
Evaluation of research in India - are we doing it right?
Indian J Med Ethics. 2018 Jul-Sep;3(3):221-229. doi: 10.20529/IJME.2018.024. Epub 2018 Mar 23.
3
What is wrong with the MCI?
Indian J Med Ethics. 2016 Oct-Dec;1(4):262-263. doi: 10.20529/IJME.2016.076.
4
Research in Indian medical institutes.
Natl Med J India. 1991 Mar-Apr;4(2):90-92.
5
The revised guidelines of the Medical Council of India for academic promotions: Need for a rethink.
Indian J Gastroenterol. 2016 Jan;35(1):3-6. doi: 10.1007/s12664-015-0617-9. Epub 2016 Feb 5.
6
Revamping Medical Education in India: New Guidelines for Eligibility Qualifications of Medical Faculty.
Cureus. 2023 May 12;15(5):e38925. doi: 10.7759/cureus.38925. eCollection 2023 May.
7
Are university rankings useful to improve research? A systematic review.
PLoS One. 2018 Mar 7;13(3):e0193762. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0193762. eCollection 2018.
8
My thoughts on teaching.
J Vet Med Educ. 2009 Fall;36(3):256-9. doi: 10.3138/jvme.36.3.256.

引用本文的文献

1
Implementing a multidimensional faculty promotion matrix at Saint George University of Beirut Faculty of Medicine.
MedEdPublish (2016). 2025 Apr 3;14:65. doi: 10.12688/mep.20416.2. eCollection 2024.
3
A tripartite challenge of orphaned manuscripts, heedless writing and reluctant reviewing...... revamping the editing process!
Indian J Anaesth. 2021 Nov;65(11):777-781. doi: 10.4103/ija.ija_979_21. Epub 2021 Nov 23.
4
Research and COVID-19: Losing momentum every now and then.
Indian J Anaesth. 2021 Jul;65(7):508-511. doi: 10.4103/ija.ija_623_21. Epub 2021 Jul 23.
5
MAKING A CASE FOR MORE CASE REPORTS.
Ann Ib Postgrad Med. 2017 Dec;15(2):80-81.
6
Predatory Journals Spamming for Publications: What Should Researchers Do?
Sci Eng Ethics. 2018 Oct;24(5):1617-1639. doi: 10.1007/s11948-017-9955-6. Epub 2017 Aug 16.
7
Predatory Publishing Is a Threat to Non-Mainstream Science.
J Korean Med Sci. 2017 May;32(5):713-717. doi: 10.3346/jkms.2017.32.5.713.
8
The mandatory regulations from the Medical Council of India: Facts, opinions and prejudices.
Indian J Anaesth. 2016 Nov;60(11):793-795. doi: 10.4103/0019-5049.193656.

本文引用的文献

1
The revised guidelines of the Medical Council of India for academic promotions: Need for a rethink.
Indian J Anaesth. 2016 Jan;60(1):1-5. doi: 10.4103/0019-5049.174800.
4
Promotion and Reporting of Research from Resource-Limited Settings.
Infect Dis (Auckl). 2015 Sep 6;8:25-9. doi: 10.4137/IDRT.S16195. eCollection 2015.
5
'Scholarly peer reviewing': The art, its joys and woes.
Indian J Anaesth. 2015 Aug;59(8):465-70. doi: 10.4103/0019-5049.162981.
6
Scientific misconducts and authorship conflicts: Indian perspective.
Indian J Anaesth. 2015 Jul;59(7):400-5. doi: 10.4103/0019-5049.160918.
7
Paying the price for open access.
West J Nurs Res. 2015 Jan;37(1):3-5. doi: 10.1177/0193945914554257. Epub 2014 Nov 6.
8
Why has the number of scientific retractions increased?
PLoS One. 2013 Jul 8;8(7):e68397. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0068397. Print 2013.
9
Predatory publishers are corrupting open access.
Nature. 2012 Sep 13;489(7415):179. doi: 10.1038/489179a.
10
Research publications: Should they be mandatory for promotions of medical teachers?
J Pharmacol Pharmacother. 2011 Oct;2(4):221-4. doi: 10.4103/0976-500X.85929.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验