Habilitation and Appointment Procedure

APPLICANTS FOR INITIATION OF THE PROCEDURE DEMOSTRATE:

• Pedagogical experience with leading semester-long courses
• Experience with supervising bachelor’s, master’s, and doctoral students
• International experience and impact independence in securing and implementation one's research activities
• Overall publishing performance, high-quality scientific output, and international response

• Major contribution to scientific publications

Meeting the field-specific indicators may not be interpreted as claimable. The habilitation or evaluation board always individually assesses the comprehensive profile of the applicant. Higher values in individual indicators than those specified in the indicative table may be required depending on the particular sub-field. The board also individually assesses situations when the applicant displays lower values in certain indicators, which are, however, balanced out by a better profile in other parameters.

Before preparation of the procedure initiation proposal, a consultation with the Vice-Dean for Research and Development is recommended.

EXPECTED PEDAGOGICAL AND PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE

Habilitation

• > 5 years of active pedagogical practice at higher education institutions
• Teaching a semester-long course (at least a seminar, tutorial, etc.)
• Independent grant activity with the potential to obtain extramural research funding
• Supervision of successfully defended bachelor’s and master’s theses (the expected numbers vary by field and are assessed by the habilitation board)
• Significant international experience, usually an international postdoctoral stay

Procedure to attain professorship

• Usually 10 years of active pedagogical practice at higher education institutions
• Guaranteeing and leading a lecture or other important semester-long course
• Supervision of doctoral students and successfully defended doctoral theses (the expected numbers vary by field and are assessed by the evaluation board)
• Leading a research or grant group, independent grant activity
• Significant and independent international experience

EXPECTED FIELD-SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS FOR RESEARCH ACTIVITY

Table – indicative requirements (first number – habilitation / second number – professorship appointment). Please note that higher indicators may be expected at individual sub-areas.

*original publications in journals above the median of the field according to WOS, monographs

**other citations may exceptionally be accepted for specific sub-areas

1. Before submitting the application, the applicant consults his / her intention with the head of the department to which the given field belongs.
2. The applicant fills in all annexes according to the MU Directive No. 7/2017.
   • In the event that the applicant has a larger publishing (and citation) activity, he/she may ask the assistant to provide a bibliometric analysis that will replace part A of Annex No. 6. The analysis is processed by the Centre for Scientometric Support and Evaluation. 
   • Please do not modify the attachment forms in any way when filling them out. If you have nothing to fill in, leave the box blank.
3. The applicant sends the completed attachments by e-mail to the assistant exclusively in Word format, and also attaches the habilitation thesis, three significant publications, and in the case of an appointment procedure, letters of recommendation.
   
   • The assistant will check the attachments and, together with the applicant, put them in a formally correct form.
4. Once the annexes are in order, the applicant will print them, sign them, and send scans to the assistant by e-mail.
   • Attachments must be structured in individual files: one attachment = one file.
   • Please name the forms "Surname_Annex 1" etc.
5. Subsequently, the applicant personally delivers all the documents listed below to the department.

WHAT TO PAY ATTENTION TO WHEN FILLING OUT THE ANNEXES:

• Fill in all annexes exclusively in English.
• Sort records (employment, study, publications) chronologically from newest to oldest.
• Each entry (publication, article) must always be listed only once – if it falls into more than one category or annex, select only one.
• List all authors in bibliographic records (do not use the abbreviation "et al.") and always state the title of the article.
• Annex No. 1 or 2:
  
  • Do not forget to fill in the field in which the appointment is being sought according to how it is officially determined (you can find it in the tab Habilitation / Appointment procedure – fields of study).
• Annex No. 4 a 5:
  • List all publications and citation records that are relevant to the field.
  • It is not possible to present scientific and pedagogical results that have not yet been published!
  • The bibliographic record must be in the language in which the publication was published.
  • In Annex No. 5, it is now mandatory to state the quartile according to AIS / SJR for records.
• Annex No. 6:
  • It is possible to state self-citations (citations by the applicant himself). In that case, it is necessary to state this fact in Annex No. 6 and at the same time to record the percentage of self-citations in Annex No. 7.
  • List each citation only once. If you state the same citation for different results, and it means that the author of the citation cited several different results of yours in his one work, it is all right to state the list citation several times.
• Annex No. 7:
  • The field Citations – international databases contains the sum of citations from the WoS and Scopus databases. Other citations are listed in the Citations – other.
  • If you have the citation analysis, enter the number taken from section 3 in the field Citation Impact – Web of Science in the Summary Metrics table in the row Without self-citations. You can choose the data from either the Web of Science or Scopus column.
  • In the Additional comments on publication activities section, it is possible to insert, for example, work-in-progress publications (which are in print or review proceedings) or anything that has not yet been mentioned in other annexes.

UPDATING THE ANNEXES:

The applicant may update documents in accordance with subsection 2 (with the exception of public lecture proposals) at any time during the procedure, but always in such a manner so that such documents are made available to all other parties participating in the procedure (i.e. habilitation board and scientific board members) no later than 5 workdays prior to their evaluation. Each updated document must include the current date and the applicant's signature; an electronic version, i.e. scan of the signed document must also be submitted.

PUBLIC LECTURE

The public lecture takes place after the habilitation/evaluation board (and the opponents) was appointed. However, its date has nothing to do with the work of the opponents, it can take place in parallel. The topic of the public lecture will be selected by the board from the three proposals of the applicant listed in Annex 1. All communication regarding this event is agreed upon between the applicant and the chairman of the board.

Information about the lecture is usually published on the institute's website so that interested members of the public can attend. The lecture must be attended by at least 3 members of the board so that it can be evaluated in writing. It is always necessary to create an attendance list of all present listeners from the event.

ONLINE PUBLIC LECTURES
At this time, when the possibility of full-time participation of a larger number of participants in public lectures is limited, we recommend proceeding as follows:

1) Public lecture in online mode – preferred option
The lecture takes place online via MS Teams, Zoom or another tool. The link to the online public lecture is usually published by the chairman on the institute's website, further at its discretion.

Formalities include providing an attendance list, which is a list of people connected online. The lecture is attended by at least 3 members of the board. After the lecture is finished, the chairman fills in Annex No. 11 – Public lecture evaluation, stating in what form the lecture was realized and also the fact that it was attended by another min. 2 members of the board who agree with its evaluation. The annex is signed only by the chairman.

2) Public lecture in hybrid mode
The lecture is attended by a maximum of 10 people (including the candidate) in a sufficiently large room, and at the same time, an online transmission via MS Teams, Zoom, or another tool is provided. The link to the online public lecture is usually published by the chairman of the board on the institute's website, further at its discretion. The applicant does not have to wear a face mask during the presentation, the others in the room do have to wear it.

The formal requirements include providing an attendance list with the signatures of the people physically present in the room, and a second attendance list, which is a list of people connected online. At least 3 members of the board attend the lecture in person or online. After the lecture is finished, the chairman fills in Annex No. 11 – Public lecture evaluation, stating in what form the lecture was realized and also the fact that it was attended by another min. 2 members of the board who agree with its evaluation. The annex is signed only by the chairman.

Scientific Board of the Faculty of Science

• Once all the necessary steps have been taken in the given procedure, it is possible to forward the application to the Scientific Board of the faculty. The meeting shall be attended by the applicant, members of the Scientific Board, the Chairman of the Board, and eventually the public (guests).
• The procedure is initiated by the chairman, who briefly introduces the candidate and provides summary information on the board's vote.
• This is followed by a lecture provided by the applicant, which lasts 15 minutes and during which the applicant should prove his scientific and pedagogical competence in the field.
• After the lecture, in the case of the habilitation procedure, the chairman comments on the opponents' opinions and selects 2 questions from their reviews, to which the applicant responds.
• Following is a discussion in which the members of the Scientific Board ask questions to the applicant.
• After a public debate, there is a non-public discussion (between SB members) which ends with a secret ballot.
• The Dean announces the result of the vote to the applicant – the proposal is either forwarded, or the procedure is terminated.