The problem of determining the effectiveness of scientific research carried out by teachers of universities is considered. In particular, the results of the publishing activity of teachers are investigated. For the comparative analysis of teachers' effectiveness, it is offered to formalize this problem in a class of problems of multicriteria optimization and to apply methods of a multiattribute choice of variants. Approaches to aggregating the effectiveness of teachers' team and justifying the advantage of choosing the most productive teams over less productive ones are also proposed. The problems of determining the most effective teacher and the most effective team of teachers are given.
- scientific research indirectly stimulates teachers to improve the quality of teaching and modernize the disciplines they teach;
- the creation of new high-quality textbooks and manuals, as a rule, is the result of the introduction and understanding of research in universities;
- the need to support at the appropriate level the scientific component of teachers and the tendency to increase the scientific potential of university teachers, the functioning of the system of graduate and doctoral studies is the main factors that dictate the need for scientific activities of university teachers; - ensuring high quality of training of students, providing them with the basics of research activities require the teaching staff to support the scientific component of their activities at a high modern level. Of the indirect positive factors of scientific activity of teachers, which indirectly affect the teachers' team, it should be noted that: - scientific research promotes additional interaction between teachers and university departments; - the need for scientific activity naturally requires the creation of new temporary research teams; - research teams in the universities can become the basis for innovative development of new technologies;
- the exchange of ideas in the mode of scientific interaction causes the appearance of synergetic effects and contributes to the improvement of both the scientific component of teaching and methodological aspects of this activity.
The purpose of the work is to develop a mathematical model of accounting for scientific results of teachers that ensures the relevance, completeness, and adequacy of the effectiveness of scientific activities of teachers and teachers' teams (departments, faculties and so on).
In addition, the purpose of this work is to develop a process of evaluation, accounting, and incentives for teachers, determining the effectiveness and coordination of research, which helps to increase the efficiency of scientific activities in domestic universities. The essential aspects of the study of the effectiveness of scientific activity are:
- control function, in particular, under the terms of the contracts concluded by the universities with teachers;
- motivation of teachers to improve the quality of methodological and research components of their activities;
- raising the rating of the universities in national and international rankings by increasing publication activity and timely updating of information on formal achievements of teachers; - transparency of scientific activity of teachers, opportunity to demonstrate the scientific level to colleagues and to compare the effectiveness with other teachers; - improvement of the corporate culture at departments and faculties.
To ensure the quality of this area should apply a qualimetric approach [
To achieve the goal of the work it is expected to perform a set of the following tasks: - to carry out the theoretical analysis of a problem of creation of a system for an estimation and quality control of teachers scientific activity;
- consider and explore the role of the subjective component in the decision support system for the quality of research; - develop approaches to measuring qualimetric effectiveness indicators of research; - to determine the main criteria for assessing the quality and effectiveness of scientific activities; - develop and apply assessment methods using expert technologies; - to offer and justify the interpretation of the integral effectiveness of scientific activity of teachers; - to offer approaches to determining the ratings of teachers, taking into account the need for their motivation to improve the quality of teaching and stimulate research.
Some aspects of determining the effectiveness of scientific research have been studied by various
scientists: Belov O.V. [
The specificity of the study of scientific activity of teachers is that the activities of high school teachers are multifaceted. Scientific activity, in principle, is not subject to adequate regulation, and in cases where research is carried out on the background of teaching, the task is significantly complicated. After all, publishing activity is only one of the many aspects of teachers' work. Therefore, the requirements for the effectiveness of scientific activities of teachers have many features and nuances. The complexity of studying this issue is supplemented by the fact that the scientific activity of high school teachers is only one of the areas of their work, and not always the highest priority.
At the same time, it should be noted that in the most common international and national rankings, the most important coefficients are assigned for high research indexes: – Times Higher Education World University Ranking; – QS World University Ranking; – Academic Ranking of World Universities.
The national system of rating evaluation of the activity of universities is also formed taking into account scientific indicators. Such indicators are, in particular: - quality index of research, scientific and technical activity: "Rating of universities of Ukraine"; - indicator of international scientometric and web-metric data: "Top-200 Ukraine"; - reputation of the universities in the field of scientific research; - the volume of the research budget of the universities per each teacher; - teacher citation indices; - formal indicators of scientific activity of teachers, which are reflected in the international scientometric databases Scopus, Web of Science, etc .; - the number of publications in the most prestigious scientific journals; - share of foreign scientists and joint publications with foreign scientists.
It should be noted that in the study of information related to research and in its analysis at the present stage, the methods of mathematical statistics are most often used.
According to the authors, to increase the level of research, appropriate mathematical models should be developed and methods of decision theory, methods of solving multicriteria optimization problems, expert technologies, "soft" calculations, etc. should be used in this field. This paper is devoted to the development of this direction.
In the authors’ view, to achieve the above purpose of the work and the formulated objectives, the following scientific directions may be useful: - multicriteria optimization problems; - processing of expert information; - determination of weight coefficients of criteria; - methods of aggregation of multi-attribute data; - methods of group choice.
In determining the effectiveness of scientific activities of teachers of the universities can also be used regulations, data from Internet resources, information about the characteristics of scientific work of teachers, modern methods of systems analysis and information technology.
It should be noted that there are usually different approaches to modeling decision-making
problems: multipurpose, multiattribute, and multicriteria. Multiattribute decision-making is carried
out for the problems of choosing from a set of alternatives, which are characterized by numerical
attributes, often in the presence of a single goal. Multicriteria decision-making is decision-making
with many attributes and the presence of several, usually opposite goals (criteria) [
We will assume that the parameters of the effectiveness of teachers' research are points in a multiattribute space. Therefore, it is logical to consider the problems of determining the effectiveness of scientific activities of teachers as problems of multiattribute choice and formalize them in the class of problems of multicriteria optimization.
In addition, it is known that building a structure of preferences in a formalized form is a difficult
problem for a person: specialists in subject areas do not always have a clear idea of the structure of
preferences on the set of alternatives. In most cases, a person can not adequately determine the weight
coefficients, as well as explicitly formulate the heuristics that are used by him in the decision-making
situation [
When solving problems of multicriteria optimization, the problem of determining the area of
effective solutions is strictly objective and is solved without the use of any heuristics. Narrowing the
area of effective alternatives requires the use of additional information from experts, as effective sets
of parameters cannot be formally compared with each other. To determine a single solution to a
multicriteria problem, as a rule, three heuristics are used [
- to translate all the values of the parameters of the alternatives to the dimensionless form in a given range of values, one of the allowable transformations is used; - the vector of the relative importance of criteria is defined; - it is assumed that the solution of a multicriteria problem is the point of intersection of the ray of the normalized weight coefficients of the relative importance of the criteria and the area of effective alternatives to the problem.
We formulate heuristics that should be used to solve the problem of multicriteria optimization.
Heuristics H1. The type of monotone function for converting the values of the parameters of alternatives to the dimensionless form is carried out according to formulas that must meet the following requirements: - take into account the need to minimize deviations from the optimal values for each parameter; - have a common starting point and the same order of change of values on the whole set of alternatives;
- maintain the preference ratio on the set of alternatives being compared, according to the set of parameters, and thus not change the set of effective alternatives.
Heuristics H2. The best alternative in solving the problem of multicriteria optimization should be considered an alternative for which deviations from the best values of the parameters for each estimate are minimal.
To achieve the goal of the research formulated in this paper, we will also use expert technologies that are widely used in various fields of human life and are actively developing in recent decades.
One of the key concepts of expert technology is heuristics, which can be axioms, postulates, assumptions, presumptions, paradigms, hypotheses, additions, propositions, and so on. Heuristics are empirical methodological rules that can help to find solutions and help to define incorrect problems.
The peculiarity of the scientific activity of teachers is that such activity, as a rule, is not exclusive or autonomous. The teacher of universities should carry out research on the background of his other professional activities. Therefore, the research of the teacher, on the one hand, can not be separated from the general flow of its activities, on the other hand, research, directly and indirectly, has a great influence on the other areas of activity of the teacher.
Let us build a table that characterizes and illustrates the criterion base for evaluating the effectiveness of scientific activities of teachers of universities.
workload: lectures, student groups. seminars, practical classes, laboratory work, etc. Preparation of Ensuring the educational student process and research area: competitions. management of diplomas, Organization and term papers, etc. holding of Development of curricula, competitions of work programs of academic student scientific disciplines. works.
courses. standing
Let the number of teachers whose activities should be compared be equal to n , and let the set of their indices be denoted by J 1,..., n .
To prepare a mathematical model for determining the effectiveness of scientific activities of teachers, let us consider some attributes of scientific and practical activities of teachers of universities vi (v1i , v2i , v3i, v4i , v5i , v6i , v7i , v8i , v9i ), i J , which can be used to determine the effectiveness of their research and used to compare the effectiveness of different teachers, different departments, as well as to calculate the dynamics of this indicator in different periods: v1i – the total number of publications of teachers, i J ; v2i – the number of publications of teachers in a given period, i J ; v3i – the total number of publications of teachers in international scientometric databases (Scopus, Web of Science, etc.), i J ;
v4i – the number of publications of teachers in international scientometric databases (Scopus, Web of Science, etc.) in a given period, i J ;
v5i – index of citations of scientific works of teachers (total number of citations of all scientific works of the teacher, department, faculty or university in scientometric bases), i J ; v6i – index of citations of scientific works of teachers in a given period (total number of citations for the period of all the above scientific papers), i J ;
v7i – average index of citations of scientific works of teachers (average number of citations per one scientific work of a teacher, department, faculty or university in scientometric databases), i J ; v8i – average index of citations of scientific works of teachers in a given period (average number of citations for the period per one scientific work of a teacher, department, faculty or university in scientometric databases), i J ;
The problems of determining the most effective teacher (from the point of view of scientific activity), the most effective department in the scientific activity, or the most productive faculty in the scientific direction will be formalized in the class of multicriteria optimization problems. In this case, taking into account the need to use heuristics in such cases, we will pay considerable attention to the subjective component of multicriteria problems.
Note that today there are three main approaches to describing the problems of introspective (internal, in-depth) analysis: using binary relations, the choice function, and the criterion approach. The latter approach involves the assumption that each alternative can be evaluated by a specific number, which is the value of the criterion, so the comparison of alternatives is reduced to comparing the corresponding numbers. It is clear that in many practical situations, multicriteria is a way to increase the adequacy of goal description.
The problem of multicriteria optimization is formalized in the following formulation: fi v max, i I1, fi v min, i I 2 , v A, A E k , where A set of alternatives (in our case – indicators of scientific activity of teachers), which are characterized by k parameters, which belong to space E k ;
y(v) ( f1(v),..., fk (v)) – vector of evaluations of alternatives or criteria, which is specified by the mapping f : A E k ;
I 1,..., k set of indexes of criteria;
I1 1,..., k1, I 2 k1 1,..., k – sets of indices of criterion functions, which, respectively, are maximized and minimized, I1 I2 I.
Thus, when solving the problem of determining the best teacher, the following approach can be proposed. First, the integrated indicators of each teacher are determined by some aspects (for example, popularity among students, publishing activity, social and organizational activities, and so on). Moreover, the application of this indicator may be preceded by stratification, namely the distribution of voting participants to bachelors, graduates, only those who attended classes more often, and so on. At the next stage, an aggregate indicator of publishing activity is determined among teachers or teachers' teams. Other aggregate indicators are also calculated. The winner is then determined by solving the multicriteria optimization problem.
That is, in most cases, the solution of problems related to the analysis of teachers' activities is a compromise. Note that for the solution adequate finding and justification should provide the calculation of the weight coefficients of the criteria.
It is possible at the initial stage to determine the weight coefficients by experts, although it is known that a person can not reliably assign weight. Therefore, it is necessary to comprehensively approach and determine by indirect methods the importance of parameters that characterize the effectiveness of scientific activities of teachers.
Research on expert evaluation problems and the practice of building decision support systems
show that experts and decision-makers do not always have a clear idea of the structure of preferences
on the set of alternatives [
There are several common ways to represent the values of the weight coefficients n of the criteria of the problem of type (1): (1) - arbitrary real or natural numbers i , i I ; - real numbers, taking into account restrictions (one-sided or two-sided), for example, i 0, i I; 5 i 5, i I; 0 i 1, i I ; i 0, i , i I ; iI real or natural numbers, taking into account the condition of centering: - real numbers taking into account the condition of normalization: i 1, i 0, i I ; iI - real numbers taking into account the idealization condition: miaIx i 1, i 0, i I .
A common form of representation of normalized weight coefficients is the interval form iH , iB , i I , 0 iH iB 1, i I.
The method of determining the function of belonging of the weight coefficients values to the fuzzy
set (0,1) is also used. Approaches to the definition of membership functions and algorithms for
constructing membership functions based on the analysis of the frequency of the values are that each
weight coefficient as a result of the procedure of accounting for the frequency of values will be
characterized by its membership function to fuzzy set [
Decision-making is based on individual or group introspective analysis of the problem and the choice of the way how to solve it. The introspective analysis consists in the observation of the researcher's own feelings, thoughts, images, experiences, acts of thinking without the use of any tools or standards and is not accompanied by significant loss of information. The study of introspective analysis and processing of the subjective component in the application of expert technologies in poorly structured complex systems is an important and relevant direction for improving decision support processes.
The problems of analysis of the scientific activity of teachers can be adequately formalized in the class of problems of ranking alternatives that is ordering the set of alternatives according to the degree of manifestation of some properties. An important and widespread tool for the application of expert technologies, which is now a classic, is the task of collective determination of the ranking of alternatives, which by some criteria is "closest" to all rankings built by analyzing parameters. The most reasonable method of finding the resulting ranking of alternatives is to calculate the median of the given rankings.
It should be noted that the aggregation of the effectiveness of scientific activities of teachers can be carried out using different measurement scales: absolute, ratio, interval, ordinal, or nominal. One of the important heuristics in the problems of introspective analysis of the subjective component of decisionmaking is to determine the average that should be applied. This is due to the fact that an important place among all methods of data analysis is occupied by data averaging algorithms. Today, there are several common averages used to analyze subjective information.
It is known [
When comparing the effectiveness of scientific activities of teachers of universities, each teacher corresponds to a point in the parametric space vi v1i ,..., vki V , i J 1,..., n , I 1,..., k, (2) where n the number of teachers, k the number of assessment parameters.
When organizing the achievements of teachers, the absolute values of their scientific achievements can be used or the achievements of teachers can be compared on an ordinal (rank) scale. That is, teachers can compare with each other on different values of parameters in the cardinal and ordinal scales. If the parameters of type (2) cannot be measured objectively, then expert estimates are used. Ordering teachers’ achievements according to the values of parameters that cannot be measured in quantitative scales can be formalized in the class of collective ranking problems.
In practical situations, problems when the parameters of teachers cannot or should not be measured in absolute terms often arise. Therefore, it is advisable to consider only the relationship between performance indicators of teachers that is to set the ranking of teachers' achievements on those parameters that are considered important for comparison or important for some current research.
Since teachers are compared by a group of parameters, the problem to determine the resulting ranking of teachers arises (taking into account the whole set of parameters). The most common method of finding a compromise ranking in group selection problems is to calculate the median of the given rankings. This group of methods used to summarize expert information is the most reliable and mathematically sound.
Suppose that k parameters are given, for each of which it is possible to evaluate teachers, that is to build such a ranking of teachers for each parameter, which indicates the degree of manifestation of this parameter in the teacher's activity. The smaller the value of the selected parameter has the teacher, the lower will be his rank in a given ranking
Ri ai1 ≽...≽ ain , i j J 1,..., n, j J , i I. (3) It is necessary to find some group (resultant, aggregate, collective, consensus, integrative) ranking of n teachers R* ai1 ≽...≽ ain , i j J , j J , which will be the closest in some sense to the rankings of teachers of type (3), built taking into account each parameter.
In this paper, the symbol ≽ denotes the relation of non-strict advantage, namely, when
≽ , . Thus, the problem is logically formalized in the class of problems of non-strict
collective ranking [
In practice, there are often situations when not every teacher can be evaluated on all the parameters
selected for evaluation. Requiring a mandatory assessment of all teachers means deliberately creating
inaccurate initial data. Therefore, it is necessary to forecast situations when for each parameter it is
possible to establish a partial order on the subset of teachers Ai , i I , the whole set of teachers
A, Ai A, i I , for whom this is possible. It should be noted that the problems associated with
incomplete data have been studied by many scientists, in particular, in [
We introduce the definition of the incomplete ranking of teachers RiH , i I , of the set A : it is a binary relation given on a subset of teachers A, A A , which satisfies the properties of completeness, reflexivity, antisymmetry, transitivity: but only on the subset A, A A , and not on the whole set A .
Let be given partial orders by k parameters
RHi ai1 ≽...≽ ain , i j J 1,..., n, j J , ni n, i I , (4) on the selected subsets of teachers Ai A,i I. It is necessary to find some resulting ordering of n teachers R* ai1 ≽...≽ ain , i j J , j J , which is built on the basis of given incomplete orders of the form (4).
The initial stage of solving the problem described in this paper is to unite all the teachers, whose achievements are arranged according to different parameters, into a single set ai A, i 1,..., n, to determine the resulting ranking R* . That is, by the subsets Ai A, i I , the full set of teachers k i1 A
Ai is determined.
It is clear that different variants of relations between subsets are allowed: Ai1 Ai2 , Ai1 Ai2 , Ai1 Ai2 , i1,i2 I.
The set of all possible teacher rankings by parameters is an area of acceptable solutions for determining the resulting ranking of teachers R* , built on incomplete rankings of the form (4).
When applying the algebraic approach, metrics are introduced to measure distances. 1) Cook metric of mismatch of ranks (places, positions) of teachers in rankings by each of the parameters d R j , Rl ri j ril ,
iI l where ri - the rank of the i -th teacher in the ranking by the l -th parameter of assessment Rl , l L, 1 ril n.
Note that the values of the ranks of teachers may not be integers, as the problem is formalized in the class of group finding a non-strict ranking.
2) Hamming metric presupposes a transition to another space. To move from the space of ranks to the space of pairwise comparisons of teachers, individual preferences for each of the parameters are presented in the form of a matrix of pairwise comparisons
Bl bilj , j I , l L, (6) where bilj 1, i, j I , l L , if and only if the і-th teacher dominates the j-th teacher by the l-th parameter. Moreover, bilj blji , i, j I ,l L. If the values of the parameters specified in the ordinal scale are equivalent for two teachers, then bilj blji 0, i, j I ,l L .
Hamming metric is used to determine the distances between teachers’ relationships d H (B j , Bl ) 0,5 bisj bils , j, l I , i, s J .
iI sI 3) The quadratic metric looks like this d k (B j , Bl ) bisj bils 2 iI sI 4) The metric of dominance are also used: 1/ 2
, j, l I , i, s J . d d (B j , Bl ) max bisj bils , j, l I , i, s J .
i,sI
(5)
l I , where il the number of indicators of teachers, which precede the indicators of the i th
teacher in the l th ranking of the form (4). B.G. Litvak [
iI
For the Cook metric (5) using the utilitarian criterion, the Cook-Sayford median is calculated: RCS CS Arg min d K R, Rl .
RR lL When using the egalitarian criterion GV -median (compromise) is calculated:
RGV GV Arg min max d K R, Rl .
RR lL For the Hamming metric (6) using the utilitarian criterion, the Kemeni-Snell median is calculated: R КС КС Arg min d H B, Bl .
BB lL When using the egalitarian criterion VG -median (compromise) is calculated:
RVG VG Arg min max d H B, Bl .
BB lL
Similar criteria that determine the medians of given rankings are used for quadratic metric, dominance metric, and preference vector.
Taking into account the peculiarities of incomplete rankings of teachers by the parameters that characterize their activities, requires the introduction of additional heuristics.
Heuristics Н3. The distance from any ranking R* to each ranking, determined by comparing the results of scientific activities of teachers, RiН ,i I , is equal to the sum of the probabilistic and definite part.
Heuristics Н4. The absence of assessments of individual teachers by some parameters creates an unknown relations between all other assessments of teachers and does not participate in the ranking that is this assessment of the teacher is not represented in the incomplete ranking. Thus, when specifying incomplete rankings for assessments for each parameter, we have the following number of teachers’ assessments:
ni given by the parameter i I in the incomplete ranking RiН ,i I , which will be a definite part of the distances;
(n ni ) i not specified by the parameter RiН ,i 1,..., k, which will be a probabilistic part of the distances. i I in the incomplete ranking
Individual incomplete advantages given by each parameter on subsets of teachers' assessments RlН , l І , can also be represented as an incomplete matrix of pairwise comparisons (MPC)
BlН biljН , j I , l L.
Hamming metric is used to determine the distances between the relations of this matrix.
Heuristics E5. The mathematical expectation of indefinite distances between teachers' assessments in the ranking is equal to 8/9. That is, the distance between the elements of the MPC, at least one of which is not defined, must be equal to 8/9 (based on the assumption that the equality of its values "-1", "0" or "1" are equally likely). And the distances between the elements have respectively the following distributions: (0,1,2), (1,0,1), (2,1,0). The probabilistic part from ranking R iН , i I , given by i th ( i I ) parameter to any other ranking for Hamming metric is always equal 9 i ( i 1) / 16, i I .
10. Aggregation of data in the calculation of objective indicators of scientific activity of teachers, defined in the cardinal scales
The accumulated experience of expert evaluation in various areas of human activity convincingly shows that any statistical operations become more useful and reasonable when reducing the number of features used for analysis. Therefore, the problem of aggregating the features that characterize the activities of teachers to a smaller number of constructed "factors" (aspects, etc.) occupies a significant place in the problems of determining the effectiveness of scientific activities of teachers. The analysis of the set of teachers' assessments by a group of parameters is to determine the level of general consistency of teachers' assessments and to select, if necessary, a group of "homogeneous" subgroups that combine the parameters of teachers with agreed assessments. The formulation of these problems is dictated by the fact that the transition to the aggregation of estimates by different parameters is possible only after identifying the structure of preferences. For example, if the overall consistency of estimates by parameters is low and the group of parameters is divided into several subgroups, within which the consistency of estimates is high, then aggregation should be performed for these subgroups by estimates of parameters.
In the analysis of assessments of scientific activity of teachers and in determining the relative importance of publications, there are problems of presenting these assessments in a systematic way and there are problems of comparison and aggregation of assessments. The use of mathematical methods in the analysis of expert assessments allows to adequately summarize the judgments of specialists and identify the information that they have in a latent form.
If there are objective parameters that characterize the activities of teachers, different approaches can be proposed. We introduce the notation for the parameters of scientific activity of each teacher j, j J , as follows:
v1j the number of articles in editions that are included in the scientometric databases of Scopus or WoS by the j th teacher;
v2j the number of articles in conference proceedings, which are included in the scientometric databases of Scopus or WoS by the j th teacher; v3j the number of articles in Ukrainian periodicals by the j th teacher; v4j the number of abstracts at international and Ukrainian conferences by the j th teacher; v5j the number of training manual and textbooks by the j th teacher; v6j the number of monographs by the j th teacher; v7j the number of prize-winning students of All-Ukrainian Olympiads and All-Ukrainian competitions of scientific works (2nd round), the supervisor of which is a j th teacher; k s the number of co-authors in the relevant scientific work (the author is one of the co-authors).
To determine the integrated (aggregated) effectiveness of the scientific activity of the j th teacher on the basis of objective indicators, it is proposed to use the following empirically derived formula: v1j v2j v3j v4j v5j v6j Q1 6 1 / ks 3 1 / ks 1 / ks s1 1 / ks / 5 41 / ks 81 / ks 5v7j / j s1 s1 s1 s1 s1 v1i v2i v3i v4i v5i v6i max 61/ ks 31/ ks 1/ ks s1 1/ ks / 5 41/ ks 81/ ks 5v7i , j J . iJ s1 s1 s1 s1 s1 We will also introduce indicators related to the survey of students to determine the best teacher: v8j the number of students who voted for the j th teacher; v9j the number of students who took part in the voting; v1j0 the number of students studying at the department where the j th teacher works. Q2 v 8j /v9j v8j / v1j0 / max v 8i /v9i vi / v1i0
j iI 8 The integral value of the teacher's rating will be determined by the formula:
Q3 Qj1 / 2 Q2 / 2, j J .
j j 12. Conclusions
In this work, the approaches to research of productivity of scientific activity of teachers of universities, comparison of scientific activity of departments, faculties, and universities as a whole are investigated. The result of scientific research is a publication that confirms the fact of scientific accomplishment, with which the scientist will be able to familiarize not only his colleagues but also the world community. The scientific work is not completed until it is published and indexed in a scientometric database. In the modern scientific world, publishing activity is becoming increasingly important for every scientist and teacher of universities, regardless of the direction of his research. The following main scientific results are obtained: - the statement of problems of definition of scientific researches productivity of teachers is offered; - a theoretical analysis of the problem of creating a system of evaluation and quality control of scientific activities of teachers is carried through;
- the role of the subjective component in the decision support system regarding the quality of scientific research is considered and researched; - approaches to measuring qualimetric performance indicators of scientific research is developed; - criteria for assessing the quality and effectiveness of scientific activities are defined; - approaches to determining the ratings of teachers are proposed, taking into account the need for their motivation;
- the interpretation of the integral efficiency of scientific activity of teachers is offered and substantiated.
In the future, based on the analysis of the obtained solutions to the problem of determining the results of scientific research of teachers, approaches to determining the coefficients of the relative performance of teachers in the form of membership function to a fuzzy set can be proposed.
13. References