DETERMINING THE PERSONAL WAGE COMPONENT FOR TEACHING PERSONNEL

The personal wage component is decided according to the criteria and procedures that have been established to evaluate how civil servants perform the tasks assigned to them and the impact of their performance on their wages. The personal wage component constitutes the part of a civil servant’s salary determined by personal work performance. The personal wage components are graded on a scale of 1 to 5 and amount to x – xx% of the wage component based on the demands of the job.

The work performance of teaching personnel is evaluated according to the main criteria for teachers, but concrete evaluation criteria should be drawn up to correspond to each specific job. The main criteria are proficiency, quality and results. In addition, the negotiations between the supervisor and the employee will cover employee cooperation skills and responsibility at work and in the work community. The results of the evaluation are categorised into five groups.

Evaluating the work performance of teaching personnel

Personal work performance is evaluated with regard to the job description and work plan. The employee’s tasks determine the level of demand, which in turn affects the set of criteria applied to the person. Overall performance is evaluated based on the model criteria for the demand level in question or other established criteria within the university. It is then compared to the performance of others on the same demand level. The performance of each teacher can subsequently be graded on a scale of 1 to 5. The differences between disciplines are taken into account in the overall evaluation. The evaluation is documented in writing and archived. The grading defines the amount of the personal wage component, i.e. the percentage of the component based on the demands of the job it equals.

The evaluation is based on strategic objectives and the tasks defined in the employee’s job description.
Previously created evaluation schemes can be used in the evaluation where applicable. Personal work performance can be evaluated through currently implemented practices, such as a presentation portfolio or the basis on which professors receive bonuses for the instruction of postgraduate research or their own scientific studies. Different universities can gather information in different ways based on the criteria.

In the evaluation of work performance with regard to proficiency, e.g. the following can be considered, depending on the practical criteria selected:

- degrees and scientific, artistic and pedagogical qualifications, qualifications of a docent especially at levels 6 and 7
- multi-disciplinary skills
- long-term teaching, professional or research experience
- successfully prepared thesis
- demonstrated skills in developing university education and research
- instructing students in preparing their thesis and/or scientific publications
- outside funding and achievements in society

The evaluation is carried out taking into account whether the job is more research or teaching oriented.

In addition, instruction in postgraduate programmes, patents and patent applications, artistic productions, international conference papers and other awards related to the job can be taken into account.

In evaluating the quality and results of the work e.g. the following can be considered, depending on what the job description emphasises:

- scientific and artistic publications and awards or work on a thesis
- teaching achievements, e.g. developing personal teaching skills, methods and material, maintaining teacher and teaching material networks
- appreciation among the scientific or university community
- number of tasks related to student counselling, e.g. preparing individual study plans or thesis instruction

The evaluation of work performance should be based on the job description in accordance with the level of demands.

ANNEX

The model criteria below can be used when evaluating the performance of teaching personnel. If there are factors on higher levels that can be applied to the person’s work, they can be considered as additional merit:

LEVELS 1 – 4

- preparation of dissertation according to plan, quality of work
- publications
- activity in teaching and the work community

LEVELS 5 – 6, emphasis on research

- qualifications
- publications
- scientific expertise, tasks requiring expertise
- teaching and instruction achievements

LEVELS 5 – 6, emphasis on teaching

- qualifications
- studies in university education
- teaching achievements, development of teaching
- skills related to technology in teaching
- instructing students in preparing their thesis
- research

LEVEL 7

- qualifications
- publications with referee, other publications
- scientific achievements (preliminary review of a dissertation, acting as an opponent etc.)
- number of theses instructed
- teaching achievements and experience, development of teaching
- teacher networks
- tasks requiring expertise

LEVELS 8 – 10

- scientific publications (especially with referee) and other important scientific achievements
- number of instructed theses
- achievements in teaching and its development in the field
- share of outside funding in budgeted funds
- administrational tasks in the university, important achievements in society and tasks requiring expertise