Qualification Guidelines for Faculty Members in Ph.D.

 Qualification Guidelines for Faculty Members in Ph.D. Program Semiconductor Technology at the Semiconductor College

 

1. order to review the qualifications of teachers for the Semiconductor Science and Technology Doctoral Program (hereinafter referred to as "the Program"), the "Qualification Review Guidelines for Teachers of the Semiconductor Science and Technology Doctoral Program at Minghsin University of Science and Technology" (hereinafter referred to as "these Guidelines") are established in accordance with the Teacher Qualification Review Guidelines of the Semiconductor College at Minghsin University of Science and Technology.
2. The review items for teacher qualification review of the Program are as follows: (1) Teaching, (2) Research, (3) Service, (4) Guidance. The scoring table and evaluation content for each review item shall be conducted in accordance with the format of the teacher qualification review form of the Program (as attached in Annex 1).
3. The total scores for the teacher qualification review of the Program are as follows: (1) Research (publications or doctoral dissertations) - 100 points, (2) Teaching, Service, and Guidance - a total of 100 points. Among them, Teaching accounts for 50%, Service accounts for 25%, and Guidance accounts for 25%. The average score for both the first and second items should be 80 or above to pass the qualification review of the Program. The teacher applying for qualification review should submit teaching, research, service, and guidance materials for review by the Program's teacher evaluation committee.
4. Special works of research should demonstrate originality and be relevant to the subjects taught or the professional field. They should be published in reputable domestic and international academic or professional journals within the past five years or accepted and scheduled for regular publication, or published by recognized publishers. If multiple works are submitted, the applicant should select representative works and reference works. Related studies can be combined into a representative work. Representative works should primarily be published in rigorously reviewed domestic and international academic journals and should be authored as the first author. In the case of co-authored works, a written explanation should be provided stating the contributions of the applicant for qualification review, along with the signatures of co-authors as confirmation. Only the achievements obtained by teachers from the previous qualification level to the time of reapplying for qualification review, as listed in point two, can be included in the submitted materials and should be specified in the list of works for evaluation purposes.
5. For current lecturers who obtained their positions before the amendment of the "Regulations Regarding the Appointment of Educational Personnel" on March 21, 1997, and have continued teaching without interruption, if they have excellent performance in teaching, service, guidance, and have special publications or a doctoral degree, they may apply for qualification review for associate professor. If qualification review for associate professor is based on obtaining a doctoral degree, in addition to meeting the recognized requirements for the degree, it should also comply with the revised requirements for the associate professor position, including substantial examination (including external review) of the thesis and other works.
6. The teacher qualification review of the Program shall be conducted by the Program's Teacher Evaluation Committee (hereinafter referred to as the "Program Evaluation Committee"). The review requires the attendance of two-thirds (inclusive) of the committee members for the meeting to be valid, and approval from at least half (inclusive) of the attending members to pass. For decisions that do not approve the qualification review, specific reasons should be provided.
7. After the teacher's qualification is approved by the Program Evaluation Committee, it shall be submitted for reevaluation by the Teacher Evaluation Committee of the Semiconductor College (hereinafter referred to as the "College Evaluation Committee"). If it does not pass the reevaluation, the qualification approved by the Program Evaluation Committee will not be retained. If the teacher is approved by the College Evaluation Committee but is not approved by the Teacher Evaluation Committee of the university or is not approved by the Ministry of Education, the submitted qualification will not be retained.
8. In addition to the regulations stipulated in the Teacher Qualification Review Guidelines of the Semiconductor College of the university, this qualification review shall be conducted in accordance with these guidelines.
9. These guidelines, approved by the Program Meeting, shall be implemented after being submitted to the College Evaluation Committee for verification. Any revisions shall follow the same process.

Evaluation Form for Teacher Qualification Review of the Semiconductor Science and Technology Doctoral Program at Minghsin University of Science and Technology

Note:

1. Both of the following scores must be 80 or above to pass the qualification review. (1) Research performance (2) Teaching, service, and guidance performance
2. If the total score of either item does not reach 80, a reason must be provided.
3. The decision requires the attendance of two-thirds (inclusive) of the committee members for the meeting to be valid, and approval from at least half (inclusive) of the attending members to pass. After approval, it will be submitted to the College Evaluation Committee for review.

Internal review content for teacher qualification review:

1. Research (100%)

   1. Performance in leading National Science Council (NSC) basic research or industry-academic collaborative research within the past five years.
   2. Research funding awarded by the NSC.
   3. Research honors or outstanding achievements.
   4. Performance in research paper publications.
   5. Performance in patents and R&D achievements.
   6. Others.

2. Teaching (50%)

   1. Teaching evaluation results (teaching effectiveness, course quality, student feedback, etc.).
   2. Results of teaching improvement efforts (development of teaching materials, teaching tools, and achievements in teaching improvement, etc.).
   3. Outstanding performance in teaching (teaching honors or outstanding achievements, etc.).
   4. Supervision of student research projects or practical work.
   5. Other relevant teaching achievements.

3. Service (25%)

   1. Administrative work within the university (participation in various administrative tasks, committee memberships at department/program/school levels, specific contributions in terms of time and resource sharing, or other assigned tasks, etc.).
   2. Participation in university activities (participation in speeches, conferences, events, etc., organized by the university).
   3. Achievements in external services (performance in educational promotion services, representing the university in external student recruitment, participating in external charitable activities on behalf of the university, performance in enhancing the university's image, etc.).
   4. Establishment, planning, and management of teaching or research facilities, etc.
   5. Other relevant service achievements.

4. Guidance (25%)

   1. Performance as an advisor or advisor for student clubs.
   2. Performance as a mentor for internship guidance.
   3. Performance in guiding students to obtain certifications.
   4. Performance in guiding students' lives, assisting learning, or participating in competitions.
   5. Other relevant guidance achievements.