IJCST Outstanding Researcher/Reviewer Award Policy

Selecting an outstanding Researcher/Reviewer for an award is an important process. Based on the article submissions and research done with us, we use the selection criteria as follows

• Quality and impact of Researcher/Reviewer contributions
• Originality and innovation in research
• Publications in peer-reviewed journals and conferences
• Grant funding and research support obtained
• Collaborations and interdisciplinary work
• Leadership and mentorship in the research community
• Impact on society and industry

Quality:

Scientific and methodological soundness of the paper and inclusion of details that allow checking the accuracy of the reflections, results and integrity.

Significance:

The issues presented are not obvious and trivial, but interesting, creditable and cutting-edge.

Clarity:

Clearly written, content accessible and engaging for a non-specialist audience.

Originality:

Not necessarily the generation of new knowledge, although that would be novel, but rather the uniqueness of the combination of the issues, techniques and methods in their application to a certain domain.

Presentation:

Well-structured with a coherent and consistent methodological order that ensures intelligibility of what is being said and a logical conclusion etc..

1. Nomination Process:

Opening nominations to faculty members, department heads, or other relevant stakeholders. Providing guidelines for nominators to follow, including submission requirements and deadlines. Ensuring confidentiality of nominations and review process, if necessary.

2. Selection Committee:

Form a selection committee responsible for evaluating nominations and selecting the award recipient(s). The committee should be composed of individuals with relevant expertise and credibility in the field.

3. Review Process:

Develop a systematic review process for evaluating nominations. This may involve:

Reviewing nomination materials, including letters of recommendation, CVs, and supporting documentation. Holding meetings or discussions to discuss and evaluate nominees based on the established criteria. Ensuring fairness and impartiality in the review process.