The Benchmark Survey Methods of the Lecturers and Chairs Work in the Higher Educational

Mechanics, Materials Science & Engineering, July 2016

ISSN 2412-5954

The Benchmark Survey Methods of the Lecturers and Chairs Work in the Higher Educational Establishments, with Using the Cumulative Ranking Index Protsiv I.V.1, a, Shevchenko O.V.2, b, Protsiv V.V.3 1 Research fellow, Economics and National Economy Management Department, Oles Honchar Dnipropetrovsk National University 2 Ph.D. in Economics, assistant professor, chair of the International Tourism, Zaporizhzhya National Technical University 3

Professor, Head of the Mining Engineering Technology Department, National Mining University, Ukraine

a

4327313@gmail.com

b

cheva-lena1979@mail.ru DOI 10.13140/RG.2.2.1002.41242

Keywords: ranking,

higher educational establishments.

ABSTRACT. is quite difficult to calculate, so can be used by only using specialized computer programs in fairly large groups (up to 1000 subjects), for example among the faculty. Such an approach encourages teachers to hard work at the same time in many ways, so it is better to use the method with "In sum places" and additional calculation "for the weighted average place".

Introduction. The quality rating of the teaching staff is afforded by normative documents [1, 2, 3]. of ranking that allows to weigh the efficiency of the individual employees including the whole chairs, and to calculate a relative index of subject ranking against the average university level. It also helps to calculate the contribution of each subject into the general university result being the most correct summing up of ranking, however allows the possibility of win (obtaining the highest placements in ranking) in consequence of unnaturally high results in one or more indices, such as publication of 10 books by one lecturer in a reporting period (semester).

Aim. To develop the methodology for the calculation of lecturers and chairs of the higher education establishments ranking by rating index, and to connect results with other counting methods.

give him the medal place at university. And most any other indices, because of lack of time for another work.

That is why summing up with using every methods above will rate the employees (subdivisions) differently, and for more objectivity, there is a sense to do one more step of rating - by average possibility to respect others, who work productive for all the rating indices, and those who concentrated on just a few of them reaching the highest achievements. In symbolic model description below using such conventional signs: number of university departments;

MMSE Journal. Open Access www.mmse.xyz

270

Mechanics, Materials Science & Engineering, July 2016

ISSN 2412-5954

number of chairs on -department; number of employees working on -chair of -department; number of indices that allows the -department to act in rating; number of indices that allows -chair of -department to act in rating; number of indices that allows the employees of -chair of -department to act in rating; total of established post deals on -chair of -department; total of established post deals (in general by university) of t-employee, who work in -chair of -department; ijt

numerical value of -index in -chair of -department; numerical value of -index that has -employee working on -chair of -department; coefficient of

chair of -department coefficient by -index;

coefficient of -employee who works on - chair of -department; weight number (factor) by -index in university; correction factor for the work priorities of departments by -index in university; correction factor for the work priorities of employees by -index in university; positioning factor of - chair on -department by -index; positioning factor of -chair by - index; cumulative ranking index (CRI) of - chair on -department by -index; CRI of -chair on -department at university; CRI of -department by university;

i ijt

CRI of -employee, who works on -chair of -department at university; inferior index shows the method by which the rating place of subject could be found, 1

adding to the last inferior index, as for example

placement of -employee, who works on -

chair of placement of -chair of - department by placement of - department by -

;

placement of -employee of -department by placement of -chair of - department at university; placement of ijth

;

department at university;

placement of -employee of -department at university; MMSE Journal. Open Access www.mmse.xyz

271

;

Mechanics, Materials Science & Engineering, July 2016

ISSN 2412-5954

Generally, this method uses for ranking as of subdivisions, so employees, though there is a sense to consider it separately for each of them. reduce the working results of each chair by - index, means to find the numerator that belongs to each employee who works full hours (on -chair of It estimates like

(1)

For the -

-

(2)

-index at university equals

(3)

index at university, like

.

(4)

Now, calculate the positioning factor of -chair on -department by -index as multiplication applicable to Coefficient, Weight Coefficient and correction factor for the work priorities .

(5)

Then find the cumulative ranking index (CRI) of -chair on -department as a quotient of

MMSE Journal. Open Access www.mmse.xyz

272

Mechanics, Materials Science & Engineering, July 2016

ISSN 2412-5954

.

After, use calculated cumulative ranking indices of -chair on -department to ranging, means each chair gets a placement that it has among the others in universities. The more the higher placement has chair while ranging by index. Among the multitude of cumulative ranking indices , the first place will get those chair, the index of which is corresponding to highest lower limit .

The last need is ranking the departments. Calculate the positioning factor of -department by index, as product of corresponding Coefficient, Weight Coefficient and correction factor for the work priorities

(6)

Then, find the cumulative ranking index (CRI) of - department as a quotient of positioning factor

Do the ranking by calculated cumulative ranking indices of -department, namely each department gets a placement that it has among the others in universities. The more ki the higher placement has department while ranging by index. Among the multitude of cumulative ranking indices , the first place will get those chair, the index of which is corresponding to highest low limit .

To find the number of indices in which department takes a part, use the next formula:

(7)

each employee by - index, means to find the numerator that belongs to each -employee who works on -chair of It estimates like

.

MMSE Journal. Open Access www.mmse.xyz

273

(8)

Mechanics, Materials Science & Engineering, July 2016

ISSN 2412-5954

-index at university equals:

(9)

index at university, like

.

(10)

Now, calculate the positioning factor for -employee of -chair on -department by -index as multiplication applicable to Coefficient, Weight Coefficient and correction factor for the work priorities.

(11)

Find the cumulate ranking index (CRI) for -employee of -chair on -department as a quotient of indices.

(12)

Later, rating is going based on calculated cumulate ranking indices for -employee of -chair on department, namely, it helps to find placement at university for each employee . The more the higher placement has chair while ranging by index. Among the multitude of cumulative ranking indices , the first place will get those employee, the index of which is corresponding to highest low limit .

For -chair of - department it is

MMSE Journal. Open Access www.mmse.xyz

274

Mechanics, Materials Science & Engineering, July 2016

ISSN 2412-5954

,

(13)

For -department it is

(14)

For -employee of -chair on - department;

(15)

the highest place gets those who has the lowest average weighted placement. Means, in multiply of placements the first one will get subject with the lowest average weighted placement that corresponds to the smallest least upper bound . case there are seven as for employees, so for chairs and departments too). For this purpose used the summation of numerical indices and coefficients by categories and all calculations make as for conventional indices.

Summary. so it can be used with a help by specialized computer programs at sufficiently large groups (up to 1000 subjects), for example among the lecturers of university. Such a

References [1] 38.

01.07.2014 y. Supreme Council.

2014.

37,

P. 2004.

[2] Standards and Recommendations for Ensuring Quality in the European Higher Education Area. K. : Lenvit, 2006. 35 p.

[3] from 23 November 2011 y.

1341 Kyiv.

MMSE Journal. Open Access www.mmse.xyz

275