Ranking Criterion
1) To have own policy and associated procedures for the assurance of the quality of scientific and educational programmes (weight =1)
2) To have own formal mechanisms for the approval, periodic review, and monitoring of scientific and educational programmes (weight =1)
3) Staff involved with the teaching of students are qualified and competent to do so (weight =1)
4) The existence of an information system installed that stores necessary data for management of your educational and scientific programmes (weight =1)
5) % between students and faculty (weight =1 if the ratio is less than 20)
6) The ratio between the number of publications and faculty
The quality of the contributions should be much more considered rather than to put pressure on scientists to publish low-quality papers with high redundancy in its content. All discussions of such numbers should be strongly related to a qualitative judgment which is not only a question of the impact factor of a journal alone but much more the relevance of the article for the scientific community to follow the ideas and results that are presented. It is anticipated that a faculty member publishes at least one paper per year.
7) Domestic assessments of research quality, citations
8) Awards: Membership in recognized academies (Academia Europea, European Academy of Sciences, Royal Society, etc.,)
9) Awards: Recognised medals and diplomas (European gold medal, Diploma di Merito, European excellence award, etc.),
10) International awards (e.g. Nobel Prizes or Fields Medals, publications in Science or Nature),
11) Collation of student feedback, national student surveys, and student-faculty ratios,
12) Surveys of employers, graduate employment rates and average graduate salaries,
13) Innovation, the output of the universities activities and findings to the economy, society, and culture, has become increasingly relevant for universities,
14) An innovative infrastructure, conducive to breakthroughs commercialization is built