A. Self-evaluation Report of the Group for evaluation by the Scientific Advisory Board of the IN3

This self-evaluation aims to shape a coherent narrative argument, supported by robust data, on the research aims, strategy, and results of the research group (RG). The evaluation period shall include, at least, the 5 past years of research activities. If the last evaluation of the group (or its inclusion in the Institute) occurred more than 5 years before the submission date, additional months or years should be included in the report.

Each group (those that must be assessed according to UOC’s quality assurance cycle) chooses the leading indicators and examples to provide evidence for the central assessment criteria: research quality, social relevance/impact, and viability. The strategy of the research group regarding the quality, social relevance/impact and viability of its research is the most central element in this self-evaluation. The indicators' relevance should be argued in the self-evaluation and based on the arguments it wants to develop. Other robust data may include benchmarking about peers, case studies highlighting the most distinctive and socially relevant accomplishments, and a SWOT analysis.

The self-evaluation should be limited to a maximum of 20 pages (appendices not included).

This report must be sent to the Scientific Advisory Board (SAB), which evaluates the RG based on the self-evaluation and an interview with the group leader and other potential RG members. The Scientific Advisory Board provides recommendations and future improvements for the RG, particularly its aims and strategy. The executive board of the university and research group will use this report as part of their quality assurance cycle.

This protocol aims to be a flexible instrument at the service of a productive and ongoing conversation about research quality, social relevance/impact, and future strategy of IN3 research groups.