A Universidade de Aveiro abriu concurso para a contratação de um Professor Associado de Economia.
As candidaturas decorrem até 10 de maio.
Reproduz-se abaixo o texto do edital:
“Doctor Manuel António Cotão de Assunção, Professor and Rector at the University of Aveiro, hereby announces that for a period of thirty business days starting on the first business day following after which this notice is published in the Diário da República, a public Competition is opened, internationally, for the recruitment of 1 (one) position as Associate Professor in the subject area of Economics.
The present Competition, opened on 16 December, 2011, as ordered by the Rector of the University of Aveiro, governed by the provisions of Article 37 and following in the Statute of the University Teaching Career, hereinafter SUTC, approved by Decree-Law No. 448/79 of 13 November, with the new wording introduced by Decree-Law No. 205/2009 of 31 August, amended by Law No. 8/2010 of 13 March and by the applicable legislation and norms, namely the Competition Rules for the Employment of Teaching Staff Under Contract to Exercise Public Functions, hereinafter referred to as Statues, published in the Diário da República, 2nd series, No. 222, on 16 November, 2010.
1 – Admission requirements:
1.1 – Applicants to the Competition must be holders of a PhD degree for over five years according to the article 41 of the SUTC.
1.2 – Applicants with qualifications obtained abroad must provide proof of recognition, equivalence or registration of a PhD degree under the applicable law.
2- Formalising the applications:
The applications are formalised by addressing them to the Rector of the University of Aveiro, under the following conditions:
2.1 – The application should include, among others, the following elements:
a) Competition identification;
b) Applicant’s identification: full name, birth date, nationality, mailing address and email;
c) Identification of the position and institution where the applicant is presently working, when applicable;
d) Identification of degrees held by the applicant;
e) Statement that the applicant declares the elements or facts contained in the application to be true.
2.2 The application includes the following documentation:
a) Copy of the applicant’s curriculum vitae containing all of the pertinent information for the assessment of the applicant considering the selection and ranking criteria of point 5 of the present notice, recommending that it be organized according to the assessment sub-factors set forth below in Section 6;
b) Copies of papers selected by the applicant as being most representative of their curriculum vitae, no more than two;
c) Content report, teaching methods and bibliography of a course unit in the subject area that the Competition is open;
d) Document that objectively highlights the number of citations of publications listed in the curriculum and explanation of the method used to count the citations with enough detail so that the jury is able to reproduce the procedure in accordance with section 6.1.1.;
e) Copy of the Identification Card or Citizen Card, copy of the tax identification number and the equivalent documents for foreign applicants;
f) Declaration by the applicant under oath ensuring that he/she is not inhibited from exercising public functions or forbidden from performing the duties for which he/she is applying, and have the physical strength and psychological profile required to carry out these functions and has complied with the mandatory vaccination laws;
g) Any other elements that the applicant deems relevant.
2.3 – The curriculum vitae should contain:
a) Full identification;
b) Contacts: address, telephone number and email;
c) Position, group or subject, service time as staff member and the name of the University or Polytechnic Institution to which the applicant belongs, whenever applicable;
d) Specialisation pertaining to the area in which the Competition was opened;
e) Copy of the certificate with the respective classification or other document that is legally recognised for the same effect;
f) Documents proving all of the elements presented in the curriculum vitae.
2.4 – The applicants from the University of Aveiro are not required to present proof of their individual process.
2.5 – How to present application:
2.5.1 – The application may be presented in Portuguese or in English and handed in via email to the Human Resource Department of the University of Aveiro (email@example.com
) by the deadline stipulated in this Notice.
2.5.2 – In submitting the application electronically, applicants are required to present a “message sent” confirmation.
2.6 – The failure to comply with the deadline set, as well as the failure or the late entry of documents referred to in subsections a) to f) of No. 2.2, will result in the exclusion of the application.
2.7 – Under the terms of subsection a) of No. 4 of article 50 of the SUTC, the jury may, whenever they see fit, request that the applicants hand in additional documents with regards to the curriculum vitae and set a deadline for the effect.
3 – Competition Jury:
3.1 The Competition jury consist of the following:
President: Doctor Manuel António Cotão de Assunção, Rector of the University of Aveiro.
Doctor João Alberto Sousa Andrade, Full Professor at the Faculty of Economics, University of Coimbra;
Doctor António Abílio Garrido da Cunha Brandão, Full Professor at the Faculty of Economics, University of Porto;
Doctor Maria Isabel Rebelo Teixeira Soares, Full Professor at the Faculty of Economics, University of Porto;
Doctor Francisco José Veiga, Full Professor at the School of Economics and Management, University of Minho;
Doctor Joaquim José Borges Gouveia, Full Professor at the University of Aveiro;
Doctor José Manuel Lopes da Silva Moreira, Full Professor at the University of Aveiro.
3.2 – The deliberations are held by roll call voting requiring the absolute majority of votes of the members of the jury present at the meeting, not permitting abstentions.
4 – Admission and exclusion of applications:
The admission and exclusion of applications and the notification of the exclusion of candidates, under the terms and for the effects foreseen in article 100 of the Administrative Procedure Code, are processed in conformity with that which is stipulated in article 20 of the Statutes.
5 – Methods and criteria for assessment:
5.1 – The method of selection is the assessment of the curriculum which aims to assess the applicant’s scientific performance, pedagogic skills and performance in other educational activities relevant to the mission of higher education institutions.
5.2 – In the assessment of the curriculum the following criteria are automatically considered and pondered in accordance with the requirements of the functions corresponding to the position to be filled with the present Competition:
a) The scientific performance of the applicant in the subject area of Economics;
b) The pedagogic skills of the applicant in the subject area of Economics;
c) Knowledge transfer;
d) University management.
6 – Assessment parameters
In applying the criteria mentioned in the previous subsection the following parameters are assessed and are attributed the points mentioned.
6.1 – Criteria for assessing Scientific Performance
6.1.1 – Scientific production. Quality and quantity of scientific production in the area that the Competition is open (books, articles in scientific journals, papers presented in conferences) expressed by the number and type of publications, and the recognition given by the scientific community (the quality of the location where it has been published and the references made by other authors).
6.1.2 – Coordination and participation in scientific projects. The quality and quantity of scientific projects in which the applicant has participated within the subject area of the Competition, whether financed through public funds of national or international agencies or by enterprises. The assessment of the quality must take into account the funding obtained, the degree of difficulty of the funding competition, the expert assessment of the projects and the resulting prototypes, particularly if they led to the development of products or services.
6.1.3 – Coordination of research teams. Supervision of academic work of post-doctoral, doctoral and master researchers.
6.1.4 – Intervention in scientific and professional communities. Assessing the capacity to intervene in scientific and professional communities, particularly by organising events, being (co-)editor of magazines, participation in the assessment of projects and articles, being invited to give speeches, participation in academic juries and advisory activities as well as being recognised through awards or other distinctions and respective impact.
6.2 – Criteria for assessing Pedagogic Capacity
6.2.1 – Coordination of pedagogic projects. Coordination and promotion of new educational projects (e.g. development of new programmes and curricular units, creation and coordination of new courses or study programmes, etc…) or reform and improvement of existing projects (e.g. redesigning existing curricular programmes and curricular units, participating in the reorganisation of courses or programmes of existing studies) as well as implementing projects with an impact on the teaching/learning process.
6.2.2 – Production of pedagogic material. Quality and quantity of pedagogic material produced by the applicant as well as pedagogical publications in journals or prestigious international conferences.
6.2.3 – Teaching activity. Teaching and coordinating curricular units. Quality of teaching activity performed by the applicant using, whenever possible, objective methods based on extensive collections of opinion (educational surveys).
6.2.4 – Course report. In the evaluation of scientific and pedagogical value of the report, some aspects will be considered: the clarity of its structure and the quality of exposure; the actuality of the content and suitability of the program, including comparison with similar subjects in other national and international universities; the framework presented on the subject and the proposed working method; the recommended bibliography and the quality of comments produced about it, and other complementary elements considered relevant.
6.3 – Criteria for assessing the knowledge transfer.
6.3.1 — Patents, registration and ownership of rights, elaboration of technical regulation and legislation. Patent authorship and co-authorship, records of ownership of intellectual property rights regarding software, mathematical methods and rules of mental activity. Participation in standardization committees and in the drafting of legislative projects and technical regulation. The evaluation of this criterion should also take into account the resulting economic valuation of patents and intellectual property rights.
6.3.2 — Consulting services, tests and measurements. Participation in consulting activities, tests and measurements involving the private and/or the public sector. Participation as a teacher in vocational training courses or technological expertise directed at companies or the public sector. The evaluation of this criterion should also take into account the economic valorization of research results achieved, measured by the contracts of technology transfer and development that have resulted and contribution to the creation of spin-off companies.
6.3.3 – Dissemination of science and technology. Participation in initiatives to disseminate scientific and technological knowledge under the auspices of the scientific community (for example organisation of congresses and conferences) and to various audiences. Publications to disseminate science and technology.
6.4 — Criteria for evaluation of University Management
6.4.1 — Applicant’s participation in management of scientific, pedagogical or institutional activities and participation in academic juries outside the institution itself.
6.5 – The weight of each aspect and criteria are indicated in the following table:
Table – weight of each aspect and assessment criteria
|Scientific Production (C11)
|Participation in scientific projects (C12)
|Supervision in academic work (C13)
|Intervention in scientific and professional communities (C14)
|Coordination of pedagogic projects (C21)
|Production of pedagogic material (C22)
|Teaching activity (C23)
|Course report (C24)
|Patents, registration and ownership of rights, elaboration of technical regulation and legislation (C31)
|Consulting services, tests and measurements (C32)
|Science and Technology diffusion (C33)
|University Management Activities (C41)
7 – Assessment and selection:
7.1 After the admission of the applicant’s application to the Competition, the jury will begin the processes of appraisal of applications, taking into account the criteria and parameters set out in this notice.
7.2 – The jury deliberates approval on absolute merit, based on the merit of the overall curriculum of candidates with regards to the subject area of the Competition and also taking the following requisites into account:
7.2.1 The applicant is the author or co-author of at least three articles indexed in any one of the following indexes: in the ISI Science Citation Index (SCI) of the Web of Science where document type = article or document type = review, in the ISI Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED) of the Web of Science, in the ISI Social Science Citation Index (SSCI) of the Web of Science or in the SciVerse Scopus with the same characteristics. The candidates must prove that they have satisfied the above requisites by including in their curriculum vitae a list of the citations confirmed by the above mentioned databases.
7.3 – In the first meeting, which may take place by teleconference as decided by the jury president and after examination and admission of applications, the jury begins to decide which applicants pass to next phase on absolute merit. For such, each member of the jury lists, through founded written proposals, which applicants they consider do not meet the requirements at both a scientific and pedagogic level as established for this Competition. Following, the jury votes on each of the proposals, none abstaining. An application is rejected on absolute merit if there is a proposal for such which obtains a majority of votes among the members of the jury present at the meeting. In this case, the other proposals to eliminate the same applicant will not be voted on, but may be annexed to the minutes of the meeting if a jury member wishes it so in order to justify their vote. The final decision on each proposal, as well as the number of votes collected by each of them, and their bases, are an integral part of the minutes.
7.4 – In the case of an application not receiving absolute approval, the jury proceeds to holding a hearing with the applicants excluded, who may contest within 10 days under article 20 of the Statues.
7.5 – The jury then assesses those candidates approved according to absolute merit, considering the criteria and parameters of assessment as well as the ranking factors in this notice.
7.5.1 – Each member of the jury applies a value, on the scale of 0-100, for each criteria or aspects regarding each applicant.
7.5.2 – The final result is expressed on a numerical scale of 0-100 and it is calculated by weighing each criteria with the corresponding weight which provides each aspect with a score. Each aspect has its own weight which is used to calculate the final score.
Expressed as a formula, the final result (FR) is calculated as follows:
8 – Voting methodology and ordering:
8.1 – The ordering of candidates should be founded on the assessment made based on the criteria and parameters of assessment and corresponding weighing factors listed in this notice.
8.2 – Before voting, each member of the jury presents a written document, that will be attached to the minutes of the meeting, with the order of the applicants, duly founded, taking into consideration the previous paragraph.
8.3 – On the various votes, each jury member should respect the order presented, no abstentions permitted.
8.4 – The jury will use the following voting method in order to obtain an absolute majority in the final ranking of candidates:
The first vote is intended to determine the applicant to be put in first place. If an applicant receives more than half the votes of the members of the jury present at the meeting, they will be placed in first place. If the applicant in first place is not determined, the voting will be repeated, but only among the candidates who received enough votes to be considered for first place, once the applicant least voted in the first round is removed. If there is more than one applicant in the position of least voted there will be another vote with only these applicants in order to determine who is to be eliminated. For this vote, the jurors vote for the applicant who has the lowest ranking, the applicant with the most votes is eliminated. If at this point there continues to be a tie among two or more applicants, the president of the jury will decide which of them is to be eliminated. Once this elimination is made, the jury returns their attention to the first vote, but only with the remaining candidates. The process is repeated until one applicant receives more than half the votes for first place. The process is repeated for second place and so on until an ordered list of all candidates is complete.
9 – Participation of interested parties and the decision:
9.1 – The applicants are notified of the final ranking in order to commence the hearings of the interested parties conducted under the terms of article 100 and those that follow in the Administrative Procedure Code, applying the adaptations outlined in article 25 of the Statutes.
9.2 – Once the interested parties have had their hearings, the jury assesses what they have heard and approves the final ranking of the applicants.
10 – Deadline for final decision:
10.1 – Notwithstanding the following paragraph, the deadline for delivering the jury’s final decision cannot surpass ninety consecutive days, starting from the deadline for submission of applications.
10.2 – The deadline mentioned in the previous subsection may be extended when there is an elevated number of applicants and or when the particular complexity of the Competition justifies it.
11 – Publication of Competition notice
In addition to being publish in Series 2 of the Diário da República the present notice is also published in:
a) The public employment pool;
b) The website of the Foundation for Science and Technology, I.P., in Portuguese and English;
c) The website of the University of Aveiro, in Portuguese and English;
d) In a national newspaper;
12 – In compliance with paragraph h) of Article 9 of the Constitution of the Portuguese Republic, the Government, as the employing entity, actively promotes a policy of equal opportunities between men and women in access to employment and professional advancement, scrupulously taking measures to avoid any form of discrimination.
16 December 2011. — The Rector, Professor Doutor Manuel António Cotão de Assunção”