Ugc guidelines new

1
UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION (MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS FOR
APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS AND OTHER ACADEMIC STAFF IN
UNIVERSITIES AND COLLEGES AND MEASURES FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF
STANDARDS IN HIGHER EDUCATION) (2ND
AMENDMENT), REGULATIONS,
2013
To be published in the Gazette of India
Part III Sector 4
UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION
BAHADUR SHAH ZAFAR MARG
NEW DELHI-110002
No.F.1-2/2009(EC/PS) V(i) Vol-II 13th
June, 2013
In exercise of the powers conferred under clause (e) and (g) of sub-section (1)
of Section 26 of University Grants Commission Act, 1956 (3 of 1956), the University
Grants Commission hereby frames the following amendment Regulations, namely:-
1. Short title, application and commencement:
1.1. These Regulations may be called the University Grants Commission
(Minimum Qualifications for Appointment of Teachers and other
Academic Staff in Universities and Colleges and Measures for the
Maintenance of Standards in Higher Education) (2nd
Amendment),
Regulations, 2013.
1.2 They shall come into force with immediate effect from their publication
in the Official Gazette.
2. The clause 6.1.0 of the Annexure of University Grants Commission (Minimum
Qualifications for Appointment of Teachers and other Academic Staff in
Universities and Colleges and other Measures for the Maintenance of
Standards in Higher Education) Regulations, 2010 (hereinafter to be called
‘The Principal Regulations’) shall stand amended and be substituted by the
following clause:-
“6.1.0 ‘The overall selection procedure shall incorporate transparent, objective
and credible methodology of analysis of the merits and credentials of the
applicants based on weightages given to the performance of the candidate in
different relevant dimensions and his/her performance on a scoring system
proforma, based on the Academic Performance Indicators (API) as provided in
this Regulations in Tables I to IX of Appendix III.

2
Provided that API scores will be used for screening purpose only and will
have no bearing on expert assessment of candidates in Direct Recruitment/
CAS
Provided also that the API score claim of each of the sub-categories in the
Category III (Research and Publications and Academic Contributions) will
have the following cap to calculate the total API score claim for Direct
Recruitment / CAS
Sub-Category Cap as % of API
cumulative score in
application
III (A) : Research papers (Journals, etc) 30%
III (B) Research publications (Books,
etc)
25%
III (C) Research Projects 20%
III (D) Research Guidance 10%
III (E) Training Courses and Conference
/Seminar, etc
15%
In order to make the system more credible, universities may assess the ability
for teaching and/or research aptitude through a seminar or lecture in a class
room situation or discussion on the capacity to use latest technology in
teaching and research at the interview stage. These procedures can be
followed for both direct recruitment and CAS promotions wherever selection
committees are prescribed in these Regulations.”
3. The clause 6.0.2 of the Principal Regulations shall stand amended and be
substituted by the following clause:-
“6.0.2The Universities shall adopt these Regulations for selection committees
and selection procedures through their respective statutory bodies
incorporating the Academic Performance Indicator (API) basedPerformance
Based Appraisal System (PBAS) at the institutional level for University
Departments and their Constituent colleges/ affiliated colleges
(Government/Government-aided/Autonomous/ Private Colleges) to be
followed transparently in all the selection processes. An indicative PBAS
template proforma for direct recruitment and for Career Advancement
Schemes (CAS) based on API based PBAS is annexed in Appendix III. The
universities may adopt the template proforma or may devise their own self-
assessment cum performance appraisal forms for teachers.While adopting
this, universities shall not change any of the categories or scores of the API
given in Appendix-III.The universities can, if they wish so, increase the
minimum required score or devise appropriate additional criteria for screening
of candidates at any level of recruitment.”

3
4. The clause 7.3.0 of the Principal Regulations shall stand amended and be
substituted by the following clause:-
7.3.0. VICE CHANCELLOR:
i. Persons of the highest level of competence, integrity, morals and
institutional commitment are to be appointed as Vice-Chancellors. The
Vice-Chancellor to be appointed should be a distinguished academician,
with a minimum of ten years of experience as Professor in a University
system or ten years of experience in an equivalent position in a reputed
research and / or academic administrative organization.
ii. The selection of Vice Chancellor should be through proper identification
of a panel of 3-5 names by a Search Committee through a public
notification or nomination or a talent search process or in combination.
The members of the above Search Committee shall be persons of
eminence in the sphere of higher education and shall not be connected
in any manner with the university concerned or its colleges. While
preparing the panel, the Search Committee must give proper weightage
to academic excellence, exposure to the higher education system in the
country and abroad, and adequate experience in academic and
administrative governance to be given in writing along with the panel to
be submitted to the Visitor/ Chancellor. The constitution of the Search
Committee could be as per the Act/ Statutes of the concerned
university.
iii. The Visitor/ Chancellor shall appoint the Vice Chancellor out of the
Panel of names recommended by the Search Committee.
iv. The conditions of services of the Vice Chancellor shall be as prescribed
in the Act/ Statutes of the university concerned in conformity with the
Principal Regulations.
v. The term of office of the Vice Chancellor shall form part of the service
period of the incumbent concerned making him/her eligible for all
service related benefits.”
5. The Table I [Category I, II &III] of Appendix-III of the Principal Regulations
shall stand amended and be substituted by Table I [Category I, II & III]
appended to these amendment Regulations.
To:
The Manager, Government Press (Akhilesh Gupta)
Secretary, UGC

4
AMENDED APPENDIX – III TABLE – I
PROPOSED SCORES FOR ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (APIs) IN
RECRUITMENTS AND CAREER ADVANCEMENT SCHEME (CAS) PROMOTIONS
OF UNIVERSITY / COLLEGE TEACHERS.
Category I: Teaching, LEARNING AND EVALUATION Related ACTIVITIES
Brief Explanation: Based on the teacher’s self-assessment, API scores are proposed
for (a) teaching related activities; (b) domain knowledge; (c) participation in
examination and evaluation; (d) contribution to innovative teaching, new courses etc.
The minimum API score required by teachers from this category is 75. The self-
assessment score should be based on objectively verifiable criteria wherever
possible and will be finalized by the screening/selection committee.
Universities will be required to detail the activities and in case institutional specificities
require, adjust the weightages, without changing the minimum total API scores
required under this category.
S. No. Nature of Activity Maximum Score
1
Lectures, seminars, tutorials, practicals,
contact hours undertaken taken as
percentage of lectures allocated
50
2
Lectures or other teaching duties in excess of
the UGC norms
10
3
Preparation and Imparting of knowledge /
instruction as per curriculum; syllabus
enrichment by providing additional resources
to students
20
4
Use of participatory and innovative teaching-
learning methodologies; updating of subject
content, course improvement etc.
20
5
Examination duties (Invigilation; question
paper setting, evaluation/assessment of
answer scripts) as per allotment.
25
Total Score 125
Minimum API Score Required 75
Note: a: Lectures and tutorials allocation to add up to the UGC norm for particular
category of teacher. University may prescribe minimum cut-off (net of due leave), say
80 %, for 1 and 5 above, below which no scores may be assigned in these sub-
categories.

5
Note 2 :
The model table proposes API scores and the mode for awarding these scores for
various parameters of Category I of PBAS.
1. Wherever the unit of assessment is the number of hours, the teacher is
required to compute the total number of hours allocated as per the time-table
or the actual number of hours spent in that activity in the previous academic
year. The institution can verify these from the official Time Table and the
record of students’ attendance.
2. In calculating the number of hours allocated, only working days/weeks will be
taken into account. For example, if a teacher has been assigned 20 hours of
classroom teaching per week in an institution that teaches for 16 weeks per
semester, the teacher would write 320 hours (plus another 320 hours if her
teaching load is the same in the second semester) in the row 1A(i). Since this
is 2 hours higher than the UGC norm, she would claim additional 2 x 16 hours
in row 1A (ii). If she has actually taught for 275 hours in that semester, she
would claim 275 hours in row 1A (iii). So, in all, she would get credit for
320+32+275 = 627 hours for that semester. She would do similar calculation
for the second semester and the total would be entered in each row.
3. In most sub-categories, the total score of a teacher may exceed the maximum
score permitted against the relevant sub-total. In that case, the score of the
teacher will be credited the maximum score. For example, a teacher who
marks 900 scripts can get credit for 300 hours and may have spent another 40
hours on examination duty. This adds up to 340 hours = 34 points. But he will
be awarded the maximum of 20 points in that category.
4. Wherever the criterion involves an assessment by the screening committee,
the teacher will be required to submit some evidence of work done. Each
institution may further develop these criteria and specify the requirements for
the various categories mentioned here.
5. Under 4c, the teacher is only required to give a proof that she administered an
anonymous feedback questionnaire wherein the students can give their
assessment of the quality of her teaching. She would be entitled to the points
irrespective of the content of the feedback. The comments given by the
students may not be used against the teacher in this exercise.
Category Nature of activity Notes Unit of
assessment
Score
Category
I
TEACHING, LEARNING AND
EVALUATION RELATED ACTIVITIES
1A (i) Classroom teaching
(including lectures, seminar)
As per
allocation
Hours per
academic year
1A (ii) Classroom teaching (including
lectures, seminar) in excess of UGC
norms
As per
allocation
Hours per
academic year

6
1A (iii) Classroom teaching
(including lectures, seminar)
preparation time
Same as
actual
teaching
hours as
per
attendance
register
Hours per
academic year
1B Tutorials and Practicals Actuals as
per
attendance
register
Hours per
academic year
1C Outside classroom interaction
with students
Max 0.5 of
hours in 1A
Hours per
academic year
Sub-total 1 Score =
hours/10
(max score
100)
2 Research Supervision
(including Masters thesis)
Max 1 hour
per student
per working
week
Hours per
academic year
Sub-total 2 Score =
hours/10
(Max score
= 30)
3A Question paper setting,
moderation and related work
Actual
hours
Hours per
academic year
3B Invigilation/supervision and
related examination duties
Actual
hours
Hours per
academic year
3C Evaluation/assessment of
answer scripts and
assignments related to
internal assessment, external
and re evaluation
Max 20
minutes per
full script
Hours per
academic year
Sub-total 3 Score =
hours/10
(Max score
= 20)

7
4A Teaching innovation including
preparation of innovative
course, use of innovative
methodologies for teaching
including bilingual/multi-
lingual teaching
Evidence to
be
provided.
Scores to
be finalized
by the
screening
committee
Outstanding = 10
Very good = 7
Good = 5
Average = 3
Modest = 1
4B Preparation of new teaching-
learning material including
translation, bridge material,
study pack or similar
additional resource for
students
Evidence to
be
provided.
Scores to
be finalized
by the
screening
committee
Outstanding = 10
Very good = 7
Good = 5
Average = 3
Modest = 1
4C Use of anonymous students’
feedback on the quality of
classroom teaching and
students’ interaction
Performa
and
summary
feedback to
be attached
2 points per
course (max 10
points)
Minimum score required for promotion: 150 out of a total of 250 from category I and
II, at least 100 (from Maximum of 180) from category I and 20 (from maximum of 70)
from category II.
******

8
AMENDED Category II: Co-curricular, EXTENSION AND PROFESSIONAL
DEVELOPMENT RELATED ACTIVITIES
Brief Explanation: Based on the teacher’s self-assessment, category II API scores
are proposed for co-curricular and extension activities; and Professional development
related contributions. The minimum API required by teachers for eligibility for
promotion is 15. A list of items and proposed scores is given below. It will be noticed
that all teachers can earn scores from a number of items, whereas some activities will
be carried out only be one or a few teachers. The list of activities is broad enough for
the minimum API score required (15) in this category to accrue to all teachers. As
before, the self-assessment score should be based on objectively verifiable criteria
and will be finalized by the screening/selection committee.
The model table below gives groups of activities and API scores. Universities may
detail the activities or, in case institutional specificities require, adjust the weightages,
without changing the minimum total API scores required under this category.
S. No. Nature of Activity Maximum Score
1
Student related co-curricular, extension and
field based activities (such as extension work
through NSS/NCC and other channels,
cultural activities, subject related events,
advisement and counseling)
20
2
Contribution to Corporate life and
management of the department and institution
through participation in academic and
administrative committees and
responsibilities.
15
3
Professional Development activities (such as
participation in seminars, conferences, short
term, training courses, talks, lectures,
membership of associations, dissemination
and general articles, not covered in Category
III below)
15
Minimum API Score Required 15
Note :
The model table proposes API scores and the mode for awarding these scores for
various parameters of Category II of PBAS.
1. Wherever the unit of assessment is the number of hours, the teacher is
required to compute the total number of hours allocated as per the time-table
or the actual number of hours spent in that activity in the previous academic
year. The institution can verify these from the official Time Table and the
record of students’ attendance.

9
2. In calculating the number of hours allocated, only working days/weeks will be
taken into account. For example, if a teacher has been assigned 20 hours of
classroom teaching per week in an institution that teaches for 16 weeks per
semester, the teacher would write 320 hours (plus another 320 hours if her
teaching load is the same in the second semester) in the row 1A(i). Since this
is 2 hours higher than the UGC norm, she would claim additional 2 x 16 hours
in row 1A (ii). If she has actually taught for 275 hours in that semester, she
would claim 275 hours in row 1A (iii). So, in all, she would get credit for
320+32+275 = 627 hours for that semester. She would do similar calculation
for the second semester and the total would be entered in each row.
3. In most sub-categories, the total score of a teacher may exceed the maximum
score permitted against the relevant sub-total. In that case, the score of the
teacher will be credited the maximum score. For example, a teacher who
marks 900 scripts can get credit for 300 hours and may have spent another 40
hours on examination duty. This adds up to 340 hours = 34 points. But he will
be awarded the maximum of 20 points in that category.
4. Wherever the criterion involves an assessment by the screening committee,
the teacher will be required to submit some evidence of work done. Each
institution may further develop these criteria and specify the requirements for
the various categories mentioned here.
5. Under 4c, the teacher is only required to give a proof that she administered an
anonymous feedback questionnaire wherein the students can give their
assessment of the quality of her teaching. She would be entitled to the points
irrespective of the content of the feedback. The comments given by the
students may not be used against the teacher in this exercise.
Category Nature of activity Notes Unit of
assessment
Score
Category II CO-CURRICULAR,
EXTENSION AND
PROFESSIONAL
DEVELOPMENT
RELATED ACTIVITIES
5A Discipline related co-
curricular activities (e.g.
field work, study visit,
student seminar, events,
career counseling etc)
Evidence to
be
provided.
Scores to
be finalized
by the
screening
committee
Outstanding = 10
Very good = 7
Good = 5
Average = 3
Modest = 1
5B Other co-curricular
activities (Cultural,
Evidence to
be
provided.
Outstanding = 10
Very good = 7

10
Sports, NSS, NCC etc) Scores to
be finalized
by the
screening
committee
Good = 5
Average = 3
Modest = 1
5C Extension and
dissemination activities
(public lectures, talks,
seminars, popular
writings not covered
under III)
Evidence to
be
provided.
Scores to
be finalized
by the
screening
committee
Outstanding = 10
Very good = 7
Good = 5
Average = 3
Modest = 1
Sub-total 5
6A Administrative
responsibility (including
Dean, Principal,
Chairperson, Convenor,
Teacher-in-charge or
similar duties that require
regular office hours for its
discharge)
Actual
hours spent
Hours per
academic year
6B Participation in Board of
Studies, Academic and
Administrative
Committees
Actual
hours spent
Hours per
academic year
Sub-total 6 Score =
hours/10
(Max score
= 30)
7 Overall contribution to the
collective/corporate life of
the institution (including
5, 6 and any other
contribution)
Evidence to
be
provided.
Scores to
be finalized
by the
screening
committee
Outstanding = 10
Very good = 7
Good = 5
Average = 3
Modest = 1
GRAND TOTAL (1 TO 7) (OUT OF
250)

11
Minimum score required for promotion: 150 out of a total of 250 from category I and
II, at least 100 (from Maximum of 180) from category I and 20 (from maximum of 70)
from category II.
******

12
AMENDED CATEGORY-III: RESEARCH AND ACADEMIC CONTRIBUTIONS
Brief Explanation: Based on the teacher’s self-assessment, API scores are proposed
for research and academic contributions. The minimum API score required by
teachers from this category is different for different levels of promotion and between
university and colleges. The self-assessment score will be based on verifiable criteria
and will be finalized by the screening/selection committee.
S No. APIs Engineering/Agriculture/
Veterinary
Science/Sciences/Medical
Sciences
Faculties of Languages
Arts/Humanities/Social
Sciences/Library/
Physical
education/Management
Max. points for
University and
college
teacher
position
III A
Research
Papers
published in:
Refereed Journals * Refereed Journals*
15 /
publication
Non-refereed but
recognized and reputable
journals and periodicals,
having ISBN/ISSN
numbers.
Non-refereed but
recognized and
reputable journals and
periodicals, having
ISBN/ISSN numbers.
10 /
Publication
Conference proceedings
as full papers, etc.
(Abstracts not to be
included)
Conference
proceedings as full
papers, etc. (Abstracts
not to be included)
10/ publication
III (B) Research
Publications
(books,
chapters in
books, other
than refereed
journal
articles)
Text or Reference Books
Published by International
Publishers with an
established peer review
system
Text or Reference
Books Published by
International Publishers
with an established
peer review system
50 /sole
author; 10
/chapter in an
edited book
Subjects Books by
National level
publishers/State and
Central Govt. Publications
with ISBN/ISSN numbers.
Subject Books by /
national level
publishers/State and
Central Govt.
Publications with
ISBN/ISSN numbers.
25 /sole
author, and 5/
chapter in
edited books
Subject Books by Other
local publishers with
ISBN/ISSN numbers.
Subject Books by Other
local publishers with
ISBN/ISSN numbers.
15 / sole
author, and 3 /
chapter in
edited books

13
Chapters contributed to
edited knowledge based
volumes published by
International Publishers
Chapters contributed to
edited knowledge
based volumes
published
byInternational
Publishers
10 /Chapter
Chapters in knowledge
based volumes by
Indian/National level
publishers with ISBN/ISSN
numbers and withnumbers
of national and
international directories
Chapters in knowledge
based volumes in
Indian/National level
publishers with ISBN
/ISSN numbers and
withnumbers of national
and international
directories
5 / Chapter
III (C) RESEARCH PROJECTS
III (C)
(i)
Sponsored
Projects
carried out/
ongoing
(a) Major Projects
amount mobilized with
grants above 30.0 lakhs
Major Projects amount
mobilized with grants
above 5.0 lakhs
20 /each
Project
(b) Major Projects
amount mobilized with
grants above 5.0 lakhs up
to 30.00 lakhs
Major Projects Amount
mobilized with minimum
of Rs. 3.00 lakhs up to
Rs. 5.00 lakhs
15 /each
Project
(c) Minor Projects
(Amount mobilized with
grants above Rs. 50,000
up to Rs. 5 lakh)
Minor Projects (Amount
mobilized with grants
above Rs. 25,000 up to
Rs. 3 lakh)
10/each
Project
III (C)
(ii)
Consultancy
Projects
carried out /
ongoing
Amount mobilized with
minimum of Rs.10.00 lakh
Amount mobilized with
minimum of Rs.2.0
lakhs
10 per every
Rs.10.0 lakhs
and Rs.2.0
lakhs,
respectively
III (C)
(iii)
Completed
projects :
Quality
Evaluation
Completed project Report
(Acceptance from funding
agency)
Completed project
report (Accepted by
funding agency)
20 /each
major project
and 10 / each
minor project
III (C)
(iv)
Projects
Outcome /
Outputs
Patent/Technology
transfer/ Product/Process
Major Policy document
of Govt. Bodies at
Central and State level
30 / each
national level
output or
patent /50
/each for
International
level,
III (D) RESEARCH GUIDANCE
III (D)
(i)
M.Phil. Degree awarded only Degree awarded only
3 /each
candidate

14
III (D)
(ii)
Ph.D Degree awarded Degree awarded
10 /each
candidate
Thesis submitted Thesis submitted
7 /each
candidate
III(E) TRAINING COURSES AND CONFERENCE /SEMINAR/WORKSHOP PAPERS
III(E)
(i)
Refresher courses, Methodology
workshops, Training, Teaching-
Learning-Evaluation Technology
Programmes, Soft Skills
development Programmes,
Faculty Development
Programmes (Max: 30 points)
(a) Not less than
two weeks
duration
(a) Not less than two
weeks duration
20/each
(b) One week
duration
(b) One week
duration
10/each
III(E)
(ii)
Papers in Conferences/
Seminars/
workshops etc.**
Participation
and
Presentation of
research papers
(oral/poster) in
Participation and
Presentation of
research papers
(oral/poster) in
a) International
conference
a) International
conference
10 each
b) National b) National 7.5 /
each
c)
Regional/State
level
c) Regional/State
level
5 /
each
d) Local –
University/Co
llege level
d) Local –
University/Colle
ge level
3 / each
III(E)
(iv)
Invited lectures or presentations
for conferences/ / symposia
(a) Internationa
l
(a) International 10
/each
(b) National
level
(b) National level 5
*Wherever relevant to any specific discipline, the API score for paper in refereed
journal would be augmented as follows: (i) indexed journals – by 5 points; (ii) papers
with impact factor between 1 and 2 by 10 points; (iii) papers with impact factor
between 2 and 5 by 15 points; (iv) papers with impact factor between 5 and 10 by 25
points.
** If a paper presented in Conference/Seminar is published in the form of
Proceedings, the points would accrue for the publication (III (a)) and not under
presentation (III (e)(ii)).
Notes.

15
1. It is incumbent on the Coordination Committee proposed in these Regulations
and the University to prepare and publicize within six months subject-wise lists of
journals, periodicals and publishers under categories IIIA and B. Till such time,
screening/selection committees will assess and verify the categorization and
scores of publications.
2. The API for joint publications will have to be calculated in the following manner:
Of the total score for the relevant category of publication by the concerned
teacher, the first/Principal author and the corresponding
author/supervisor/mentor of the teacher would share equally 60% of the total
points and the remaining 40% would be shared equally by all other authors.
3. The parameters listed in table of category-III (Research and Academic
contributions) shall have following capping in relation to the total API score
claimed by the candidates:-
 III (A) : Research papers (Journals, etc) 30%
 III (B) : Research publications (Books, etc) 25%
 III (C): Research Projects 20%
 III (D): Research Guidance 10%
 III (E): Training Courses and Conf/Seminar, etc 15%
-:0:-

Ugc guidelines new

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Similar to Ugc guidelines new (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Ugc guidelines new