I think his/her ability to lead projects. And publish in good spaces, in good journals and editorials. Also... to train new researchers. The ability to supervise doctoral and master theses.

For ranking criteria of the researcher, in my opinion, he/she should be assessed from the number of research published in refereed journals and impact of those publications (i.e., citations) during the period of assessment.

Dear Sadanand

and published books for example, what do you think

If you ask what criteria are being used, you have answered it yourself. If the question is what criteria should be used, the answer is: no single criterion, and no set of formal ("objective") criteria could be adequate - the scientific "value" of a researcher is too complex and too strongly depending of the particular "context" (branch of science, concrete topic of study, number of other scientists working on similar and/or interrelated topics, employing institution, &c., &c., &c.) to allow reduction of serious evaluation to a single formal "index"! Attempts to do so invariably result in false, unjust conclusions and ultimately lead to decrease of the real scientific value of work, forcing scientists to "play the game" (focusing on a kind of ‘academic prostitution’, in which work is done to please editors and referees rather than to further knowledge” [Frey & Osterloh. 2010. Nature 465, 7300: 871) : hunt - by "exchange of authorships", selection of "fashionable" topics and/or methods, &c. - for "impact factors", "citation indices" &c. instead of concentrating on serious study of scientifically most interesting questions!

@Roman Bohdan Holynski, I fully agree with you!!!...thank you for your wise comment

I believe that the rankings are no indicator of the quality of the researcher's work and scientific achievements.

The point is for the researcher to implement his ideas, be satisfied with his work and feel pride in what he does, he should not be evaluated in terms of ranking lists.

The rankings do not show the scientist objectively in scientific terms.

Roman Bohdan Hołyński

I fully agree with your ideas. I am for example against the H-Index which does not at all mean the value of a researcher. assessing a teacher is complex and complicated. Not to evaluate it at all is to eliminate competitiveness, promotions, etc. it is true that this also depends on the disciplines. current indicators are becoming increasingly obsolete. new evaluation mechanisms must therefore be found. these mechanisms are found by peers, but also by employers. from where the idea of ​​my question and the debate which I want to establish, which can be lead to something?

Roman Bohdan Hołyński Waldemar Łasica Safia Belhadj Sadanand Pandey

Dear All

je suis entierement d'accord avec vos idées. je suis par exemple contre le H-Index qui ne signifie pas du tout la valeur d'un chercheur.

évaluer un enseignant c'est complexe et compliqué.

Ne pas l'évaluer du tout, c'est éliminer la compétitivité, les promotions, ... etc.

il est vrai que cela aussi dépend des disciplines.

les indicateurs actuels deviennent de plus en plus obsoletes.

il faut donc trouver de nouveaux mécanismes d'évaluations. ces mecanises sont a trouvés par les pairs, mais aussi par les employeurs. d'ou l'idée de ma question et du débat que je veux instaurer, qui peut etre debouchera sur quelques chose?

Great answer Roman Bohdan Hołyński.

Thank you

In my view the publications ... Indexed articles (Q1)...

Presentation Journal Impact Factors, Researcher h-index, How to improve r...

Thank you Dear Sylvia

Dear Emad Thank you

Dear Mundher Thank you

Any ranking parameters doesn't fully define a researcher or a scientist or a teacher. The major thing is that the quality of research or how they are resolving the social problems of humans by their research is important.

Thank Dear Rosana

Dear Gulbir

what do you mean by "research quality". how to quantify this quality?

L'honnêteté, mais comment la mesurer.

Honesty, but how to measure it.

the H-Index does not show the true value of a researcher.

For the moment, there is not an ideal indicator to evaluate a researcher or a teacher. I say it again and again, we must give value to the strictly personal work of a researcher. There are thousands of researchers who paste their names into an article without having made any effort. Everything has to be reviewed, even indexed journals. The H-Index and the RG are to be reviewed. For example, these indices make the same classification for researchers from different specialties. No, this is completely false, a classification by specialty is required.

For me the only criterion that is valid today, is to pass before a jury. It is the jury that can classify researchers in the same specialty.

Gulbir: "The major thing is that the quality of research or how they are resolving the social problems of humans by their research is important" - the "quality of research" and "resolving social problems" are totally independent questions and should not be confused!. The quality of research should be evaluated according to scientific criteria: how much and how reliably it extends the knowledge about the structure and functioning of the world; who, when and how can use the results of this research for any practical purpose is a quite different problem, that of applications ["technology sensu lato"]! History of technological (agricultural, medical, engineering &c.) development clearly shows that, as Polish physicist Łukasz Turski points out, "in longer perspective everything what is good science, from the theory of numbers to the origins of Papuan languages, can be practically applied", but the most useful applications of the most important scientific discoveries are but very rarely immediately predictable: Gregor Mendel did not know that his countings of flowers and grains of peas will "revolutionize" agriculture and medicine; Michael Faraday, asked what can be use of his studies on electromagnetic induction, answered: "I have no idea, but I'm sure that His Majesty's Treasurer will tax it very soon" - and indeed, now we learn about the applications in school; the aim of Alexander Fleming's research was not discovery of antibiotics, he wished "only" to clarify the interrelations between fungi and bacteria; &c., &c., &c., similar wee the motivations for the studies of Luigi Galvani, Ernest Rutherford, Maria Skłodowska-Curie, and almost all other "Giants on whose shoulders we are standing" (as one of them, Isaac Newton, elegantly formulated)!

I fully agree with you Mr Roman Bohdan Hołyński, but we are not on the same wavelength. What I wrote was a direct response to the question asked. The question asked is: What is the best indicator or ranking criterion for a teacher, a researcher?

A combination of Knowledge, honesty, dedication, and good academic practices in the working environment helps to achieve all the criteria mentioned above. An active person is a successful person. Obviously, publishing articles with new insights into the prestigious journal can be a good indicator.

incredible, i think that i am on the same wave lenght of Roman Holynski always.

Thanks, Salvatore!

A. Kettab, Boualem & al.: "how to quantify this quality?", what is the best "ranking criterion"? - Quite simply: such criterion does not exist! Whether the bureaucrats wishing to "quantify" everything like this or not, "not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted" - Albert Einstein!

Dear All. Institutions must give budgets, but on the basis of evaluation. researchers must be promoted, but on criteria. the researcher wants to be valued. somewhere everyone wants this assessment. the question is: what are the right criteria that suit everyone.

For the researcher ranking indicator, it should be based on the bibliometric science! As the journal ranking and quality is based on the Impact factor, the researcher ranking is based on both the h-index and the i10-index

Thank you Dear Amine Moulay

I think the suitable indicator for the researcher is the benefit from your articles that treat of real problem.

I totally agree with Mazin Ali A. Ali !!!

Thank you Dear Mazin Ali

Thank you Dear Silvia

Dear All. Thank you for your feedback.

we can not give ranking for a teacher.

For researcher we can say that the work carried by him can beeasured in terms of citations and h index.

The out come of the researcher is in the form of patents.

Sometimes ranking is not the best measure of performance for a teacher or researcher but the impact of his or her research or the solution proffer through his teachings.

Good question

Thank you Dear Najeem

Thank you dear Utsav Poudel

I think his/her ability to lead projects. And publish in good spaces, in good journals and editorials. Also... to train new researchers. The ability to supervise doctoral and master theses.

Thank you Dear @Silvia Marcu

I agree with Najeem Olawale Adelakun. A teacher or a researcher should be assessed by his impact on people. How many people has he mentored. Has his publications made significant contributions to the academic community? Does he has ground breaking research? Was his research a background for ground breaking research? One good quality research paper in my opinion is more than tens of articles.

You could find researchers whose names are mentioned in many publications, but they really do not contribute effectively. This is why the reputation of researchers is very important among its collaborators and PhD students, as well as the recommendations of other researchers.

Thank you Dear Abubakar

Thank you Dear Rachida Chemini

Dear All. In theory there are many criteria or qualities of a teacher. But what are the easily measurable indicators? these indicators must be international. for now, it's impact factor publications and citations.

I do agree with A. Kettab . Impact factors for journals, while h-index and i10-index for recerchers.

thank you dear Amine Moulay

Thank you for all for your comments and suggestions.

Thanks you Dear Omar H.

Thank you Dear Rachida Chemini

This is a very good question. All of these indicators have been put in place in an attempt to "quantify" the output of researchers. However, in my opinion, the impact of the researchers' work is what really counts. Actually, you would be surprised if you check the H-Index for some of Nobel laureates. For example, our recent Canadian Nobel laureate, Prof. Donna Strickland who won Nobel prize in physics in 2018, has an H-index of 17 in Scopus! Does that mean her work has less impact than another researcher whose H-index is 20 or even 30? Absolutely not. That is why we should look at all of these indicators carefully and not use them as a way to compare researchers. Quality is what matters and not quantity.

Dear Atef. I absolutely agree with you. For me, I don't believe in the H index at all.

Contributions in research, academia/teaching, and community-service are all important and complement each other.

As a teacher, is he/she liked by the students, do the student learn anything?

As a researcher, are his papers worth reading? Do I learn anything from them?

I agree with Omar H. Abdalla

Thank your Dear Dehbi

Thank you Dear Michael

Thank you Dear Hassan

Thank you Dear Omar

Dear All. it is true that there are many criteria. But what are the criteria that can be measured internationally.

Dear Najeem Olawale Adelakun , I seconded your valuable comment, but how to evaluate or quantify the IMPACT of research or teaching, please?

A great teacher needs not to be a great researcher..the scales of judging their greatness are not same..

Thank you Dear Md Rabiul

Evaluate a researcher it is currently possible thanks to international indicators (number of publications, number of citations, ... etc). Evaluating a teacher is something else. the indicators are not the same. therein lies the problem or problematic.

I would note that depending on the country, the universities, there are:

- university teachers.

- university researchers.

- university teachers and researchers. Of course I speak here only of the university sector, without speaking of the other sectors (industrial, ... etc)

Thank you Dear Amina

The researcher must first of all have creativity (of course, not only), and the teacher should have knowledge. But complete lists of “merits” most likely do not include the number of citations and the H-factor. Everyone knows methods for their increase.

University teachers are also known as researcher as they guided many projects of their students. Internationally researchers evaluate by their quality publications in high impact journals. Number of quality books publication and articles so and so are the criteria to judge the researcher ability.

The best indicator or ranking criterion for a teacher, a researcher is: The number of publications with Impact Factor, the number of citations, the number of conferences,The number of books, the number of PhD doctorates framed, the number of patents. Teachers and researchers are regularly evaluated for their promotions by their institutions. Each of these institutions has different criteria.

In my opinion, the dominant criterion (single parameter) for evaluating a teacher is his or her output in terms of the number of very successful mentees he or she has produced.

The criterion for evaluating a researcher should be output in terms of the magnitude of the impact of the research efforts reflected in publications in reputable journals , books and intellectual conferences.

In my opinion the distinguished teacher possesses the following skills:

1. personal skills such as intelligence, calmness, balance, leadership, outward appearance, social and tactful person.

2. Office skills such as language skills, flexibility in work, acceptance of opinion and other opinion, able to make difficult decisions.

I agree with Najeem Olawale Adelakun that ranking sometime is misleading and puts both the learner and instructor under unwarranted pressure to perform and can be misleading and inaccurate

The indicators are good teaching and research skills that impact knowledge on students, and publications in high impact research journals with high citation counts.

Thank you very much dear Isa Baba Koki

Thank you very much dear Joan Nyika

Thank you very much dear Omar Ali Al-Khashman

Thank you very much dear Harold Chike

Thank you very much dear Smaoun Mansour

Thank you very much dear Sonia Morya

Thank you very much dear Vadim S. Gorshkov

Thank you dears A. Kettab and Omar H. Abdalla. This is a very fruitful discussion. All the best to you!

The quality of a researcher cannot be evaluated by the number of publications but solely by their relevance and quality.

Thank you very much dear Atef Mohany

Thank you very much dear Jean-Pierre Jost

I fully agree with Jean-Pierre Jost. It is not the quantity or number of articles, but the quality and relevance.

In addition, the personal work of a teacher or a researcher is essential. Publishing in a group is good but it is not enough to assess the quality of a researcher or a teacher.

Boualem Remini

Thank you very much Professor REMINI for your opinion and very useful and beneficial comments.

The best indicator or classification criterion for a teacher, a researcher is: Number of publications with Impact Factor, Number of citations, number of conferences, The number of books, the number of PhD doctorates framed, the number of patents. Teachers and researchers are regularly evaluated for their promotions by their institutions. Each of these institutions has different criteria.

The best indicator or classification criterion for a teacher, a researcher is: Number of publications with Impact Factor, Number of citations, number of conferences, number of books, the number of PhD doctorates framed, the number of patents. Teachers and researchers are regularly evaluated for their promotions by their institutions. Each of these institutions has different criteria.

Thank you Dear Smaoune ans Boumalek

The best indicator or classification criterion for a teacher, a researcher is: Number of publications with Impact Factor, Number of citations, number of conferences, The number of books, the number of PhD doctorates framed, the number of patents. Teachers and researchers are regularly evaluated for their promotions by their institutions. Each of these institutions has different criteria.

Researchgate currently has the best criteria for evaluating researchers. Researchgate takes into account around thirty indicators, all of them very interesting. Well done to Researchgate and congratulations.

In my opinion, the criteria for ranking universities are as follows: - The Number of articles published, number of patents made, number of research projects carried out with success and number of innovations made.

The best indicator or ranking criterion for a teacher, a researcher is: The number of publications with Impact Factor, the number of citations, the number of conferences,The number of books, the number of PhD doctorates framed, the number of patents. Teachers and researchers are regularly evaluated for their promotions by their institutions. Each of these institutions has different criteria.

The best indicator or ranking criterion for a teacher, a researcher is: The number of publications with Impact Factor, the number of citations, the number of conferences,The number of books, the number of PhD doctorates framed, the number of patents. Teachers and researchers are regularly evaluated for their promotions by their institutions. Each of these institutions has different criteria. … Read more

Share

The best indicator or ranking criterion for a teacher, a researcher is: The number of publications with Impact Factor, the number of citations, the number of conferences,The number of books, the number of PhD doctorates framed, the number of patents. Teachers and researchers are regularly evaluated for their promotions by their institutions. Each of these institutions has different criteria.

Mister Smaoun. you repeated the same answer several times. this is a good answer and i recommended it only once. I think this is definitely a copy paste error. but it does not matter. Thank you for your contribution.