Applicants demonstrate:

• 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

Before preparing an application for the initiation of the procedure, consultation with the director of the relevant institute or the Vice-Dean for Science and Research of the MU Faculty of Science is recommended. Consultation is also advisable if the expected pedagogical and professional experience do not match the applicant's actual experience.

Meeting the field-specific indicators may not be interpreted as claimable. The 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.

Expected pedagogical and professional experience

Habilitation procedure

• More than 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

Professor appointment procedure

• 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 (1st number – habilitation procedure / 2nd number – professor appointment procedure). 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

FACULTY ANNEX ANNEXES BY DIRECTIVE

What to pay attention to

Habilitation thesis

• The habilitation thesis is primarily submitted in electronic form. The possible number of printed copies is later determined by the habilitation board according to its needs, resp. according to the requirements of opponents. If the electronic version of the thesis is sufficient for the assessment, it is not necessary to submit the habilitation thesis in printed form.
• ATTENTION! In the case of licensing restrictions on already published articles or book chapters, the applicant must indicate this fact in Annex 1 and indicate the extent of the restrictions on the publication of the habilitation thesis. If the entire habilitation thesis cannot be published, the applicant should submit (1) the full version of the thesis, which will be stored as non-public, and (2) a version with selected parts of the thesis that can be published.
• ATTENTION! There are several types of habilitation thesis. Section 5 of the MU Directive specifies the requirements for each type of thesis. For reference, we list the requirements of the most common type of thesis, the collection of previously published scholarly works:
• It consists of already published works! Postprints or early access articles can also be part of the thesis.
• It is not possible to include scientific papers that have not yet been officially published, or preprints, discussions, reviews, conference papers.
• It contains a so-called commentary. The commentary is in English and, like the abstract, it should briefly (1–2 pages) present what the applicant has done in the habilitation thesis, what the main aims and results are, what methods were used, etc. In the case of articles with co-authors, it is important to include the applicant’s contribution in terms of both quality and content.
• An example of a possible commentary structure can be found in the qualification procedure of one of the applicants, the template can be downloaded here.

All annexes

• Fill in the annexes in English, BUT do not translate (1) academic degrees obtaines – indicate in the form as in appears on your diplomas, (2) records of publications that have been published in Czech or another language and do not have an English equivalent.
• 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.
• Do not delete anything from the forms. In case you do not use the section/table, leave it blank.

Annexes No. 1, 2 and 3

• List the abbreviations of your degrees exactly as they appear on your diplomas (do not translate into Czech etc.). 
• Do not forget to fill in the field in which the appointment is being sought according to how it is officially determined: Fields of study of the habilitation / professorship procedure.

Annexes No. 4 a 5

• List all publications and citation records that are relevant to the field.
• It is not possible to list scientific and pedagogical results that have not yet been published (e.g. preprints, postprints)! These can be listed only in the category Other works considered important by the applicant.
• The bibliographic record must be in the language in which the publication was published.
• In Annex No. 5, it is mandatory to state the quartile according to AIS / SJR for records where it is possible.

Annex No. 6

• In case you have a high publication and citation activity, you can replace Annex 6 (resp. part A of the annex) in one of two ways, by:
  • a citation analysis prepared by the Center for Scientometric Support and Evaluation,
  • a generated list of citations from WoS or Scopus.

In either case, please contact the assistant.

• It is possible to state self-citations. In that case, it is necessary to state this fact at the beginning of Annex No. 6, and at the same time to write down the share of self-citations in Annex No. 7.
• List each citation only once. It's all right to list the same citation several times only if it applies to different results, and it means that the author of the citation cited several different results of yours in his one work.

Annex No. 7

• If you don't have a citation analysis: the field Citations – international databases contains the sum of citations from WoS and Scopus databases. Other citations are listed in Citations – other.
• If you do have a citation analysis: enter the number taken from section 3. Citation Impact – Web of Science in the Summary Metrics table. You can select the data from either the Web of Science or Scopus. You can enter the number of citations with self-citations, but then you need to fill in the share of self-citations. If you do not want to list self-citations, enter the number of citations without self-citations and leave the share of self-citations blank. Citations from databases other than WoS and Scopus are listed in Citations – other.
• In the Additional comments on publication activities section, it is possible to list anything that has not yet been mentioned in other annexes.

Updating the annexes

You may update the annexes – with the exception of public lecture proposals in Annex 1 or 2 – at any time during the procedure, but always in such a manner so that such annexes 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 your signature. Both electronic and physical versions of this document are required.

Public Lecture Evaluation form

Scientific Board of the MU 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 applicant 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' reviews and selects up to two 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 Scientific Board 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.