PUBLISHING FOR ACADEMIC PROMOTION AT UDSM:

REQUIREMENTS AND PROCEDURES

UDSM WOMEN LEADERS SEMINAR

16TH MARCH 2020
APC, DAR ES SALAAM

BY
DR. PENDO S MALANGWA
DIRECTOR, QAB & UPC CHAIR
Outline

1. Introduction
2. Instruments for Assessing Publications
3. Where to Publish?
4. Some Aspects for Vetting and Stages
5. Rules guiding assessment of publications and
award of points (Content assessment)
6. Conclusion
  1. Introduction

 UDSM whose vision 2061 is “to become a reputable world-

class university” has put in place modalities/requirements
and procedures for assessing the quality of publications for
purposes of staff promotion and advancement of scholarship.
 The assessment of quality is as per the general procedure
done on:
The media of publication
 The quality of the published material (content)
 An academic staff aspiring for promotion at any rank should
submit her publications for both channels. We will discuss
this later in this presentation.
 2. Instruments for Assessing Publications

I. United Republic of Tanzania, Treasury Registrar (2014) Scheme of Service for

Academic Staff in Public Universities and Constituent Colleges;

I. UDSM (2016) Guidelines for the Assessment of Academic Staff Performance;

II. Mandates of the University Publication Committee (following the reorganization

of the Office of the DVC – Research by the UDSM Council at its 232 nd meeting
held on 6th November 2015);

III. Various UDSM Senate decisions issued from time to time [e.g. the decisions of
the 331st UDSM Senate Meeting (Senate Memorandum No. 331.4.3) held on 4th
May 2017;

IV. UDSM Annual Senate report on Evaluation of Journals published by the UDSM
and Other selected institutions]
3. Where to Publish?
• With increasing pressure on the part of
academics to “publish or perish” there
has been an increasing danger for some
academics to publish in outlets with
poor quality so much so that they can
have the required number of
publications - publish with predatory
publish.
• Normally such outlets among other
things do not conduct a thorough peer
review process – this can be seen in
the policy their journals (i.e. instruction
to authors), looking for papers from
academics to publish with them, etc.
3. Where to Publish?
• Being mindful of this situation, in 2015
the UDSM established the University
Publication Committee (UPC) with the
main objective of vetting the
authenticity, quality and status of the
publication media as well as ensuring
that they meet the requirements for
promotion to the recommended ranks.
• In the instruments, there are varied
requirements for promotion from L to
SL and that one of from SL to AP, e.g.
for professors the requirement is that
all journal papers should be accessible
online and in the journal indexed.
Publication
4. Some Aspects for Vetting and Stages
Journal  Competent Editorial Boards comprised of senior academics and
Articles experienced professionals in specific disciplines, and must
originate from different institutions and countries.
 Wide Journals Circulation
 Timely journals publication
 Clear manuscript review procedures/indication of peer review
 Clear and adequate authors instructions
 Internationally authored articled
 Comprehensive subscription rates
 International Standard Number
 Developed and dated Journal websites
 Indexed in International databases

Conferenc Retrievable from referred proceedings

e Papers

Scholarly  A scholarly book with an ISBN number

Books/ Book  Peer-reviewed
Chapters  Reputable publisher
4. Some Aspects for Vetting and Stages

The process of
vetting of
media of
publication
 4. Some Aspects for Vetting and Stages…
The process of • All journals for promotion at all ranks should be Senate approved journals and
vetting of that the system of vetting these journals involves all academic units.
media of
• It has become difficult to distinguish between credible open source journals
publication
and those of predatory type which don’t do peer-review and provide fake
information.

• It was against this background that in 2016 the University banned ALL journals
which charge processing/publication fee to be used for promotion.

• However, in 2017, the University opened a narrow window to accept only

open access publishers which charge publication fee for dissemination but
whose peer review process is not questionable.

• This decision was reached by the 331st Meeting of the Senate held on 4 May
2017 when considering publication in international journals: “…publishing in
international journals has become chaotic due to existence of predatory
publishers, who are after quick money and desire quick publishing while
compromising the quality of the peer review process…some journals issue
advertisements to publish papers within four (4) days or two weeks from the
day of receiving the paper to final publication. Such a quick publishing process
is doubtful and suspicious [Senate Memorandum No. 331.4.3].” 
 4. Some Aspects for Vetting and Stages

•Senate directed: (a) Academic units should vet the international journals
in which members of staff will publish. These should include journals in
renowned publishers like Elsevier, Springer, Wiley, Oxford Press, Emerald,
Taylor and Francis, Royal Society etc; (b) journals should be indexed in
international renowned databases such as Scopus, Web of Science,
Science Citation Index, Social Science Citation index etc; (c) journals should
have an impact factor issued by Thomson and Reuters; (d) having vetted
them, the same list shall be vetted at College Board and final vetting shall
be by the UDSM Publication Committee.

•In 2019, the UDSM Senate approved 15 out of more than 20 UDSM
journals to be used for professorial rank as international journals. They
include:-
 4. Some Aspects for Vetting and Stages
(UDSM International Journals)
• The Journal of Education, Humanities and Sciences
• The African Review: A Journal of African Politics, Development and
International Affairs
• Business Management Review (BMR)
• Kioo cha Lugha
• Kiswahili
• The University of Dar es Salaam Library Journal
• Tanzania Economic Review [TER]
• Tanzania Journal of Development Studies
• Tanzania Journal of Science
• Journal of the Geographical Association of Tanzania
• Tanzania Zamani
• Utafiti Journal
 4. Some Aspects for Vetting …
(Vetting Codes used by UPC)
 In the vetting process, the following codes are used in recommending or
not recommending a publication by UDSM staff for promotion:
 For reputable peer-reviewed materials and materials published in the
renowned reputable publishers by the UDSM as per Senate decision of
331st meeting of 4th May 2017 (Taylors and Francis, Elsevier, ACS, RSC,
springer, oxford, Cambridge, Harvard, nature, emerald, SAGE, etc.)=
Recommended.
 For materials published book chapters and proceedings that are cannot be
retrieved online=Recommended subject to providing evidence of the
published material.
 For articles in press and cannot be accessed online= Recommended
subject to producing evidence of accepted letter indicating the
volume/issue and year that the manuscript will be published as per the
UDSM Guidelines for the Assessment of Academic Staff Performance of
January 2016, Appendix B Section 1 (a), (iv).
 4. Some Aspects for Vetting …

(Vetting Codes used by
In the vetting process, the following codes are used …:
UPC)
 For Journals with a clear indicated article processing charges and unrenowned
open access publishers/materials=Not recommended. The journal charges
publication fee of USD 300 and the publisher is not in the list of renowned
reputable publishers by the UDSM as per Senate decision of 331st meeting of 4th
May 2017.
 For Journals with APC+ fast-tracking option=Not recommended. (a) The journal
charges publication fee of Swiss Francs 350 and the publisher is not in the list of
renown reputable publishers by the UDSM as per Senate decision of 331st meeting
of 4th May 2017; (b) The review process was fast tracked [Received: 10 December
2015 / Revised and Accepted: 30 December 2015] that might have comprised with
the quality of the article contrary to the UDSM Senate decision of 331st meeting of
4th May 2017.
 OR Not recommended. (a) The journal charges publication fee of USD 200 and the
publisher is not in the list of renown reputable publishers by the UDSM as per
Senate decision of 331st meeting of 4th May 2017; (b) The review process is fast
tracked [two to three weeks] that might comprise with the quality of the article
contrary to the UDSM Senate decision of 331st meeting of 4th May 2017
 4. Some Aspects for Vetting …
(Vetting Codes used by UPC)
 In the vetting process, the following codes are used …:
 For journals/publishers with no clear editorial board, peer-
reviewing process, and poor accessibility= Not
Recommended: Journal lacks necessary information (Editorial
Board, review process and instructions to authors).
 For journals materials that do not provide information on
journal title, volume/issue, pages etc.= Not Recommend:
Paper lacks necessary information (Journal title, journal
volume/issue and year of publication).
 For short notes, records, editorial notes etc. =Not
Recommended. This is not a scholarly material as per the
UDSM Guidelines for the Assessment of Academic Staff
Performance of January 2016, Section 2.1.
 4. Some Aspects for Vetting …
(Vetting Codes used by UPC)
 In the vetting process, the following codes are used …:
 For predatory and fast-tracked published materials = Not
recommended. (a) The publisher possesses features of predatory
journals (i.e. Universal Research Publications which contains a list
of 53 journals has one and the same Editorial board); (b) The
review process is fast tracked [takes a maximum of two weeks]
that compromises with the quality of the article contrary to the
UDSM Senate decision of 331st meeting of 4th May 2017.
 FOR INTECH/LAMBART/IEEE/ETC= Not recommended. The
publisher charges publication fee of GBP 1,400/chapter and the
publisher is not in the list of renowned reputable publishers by
the UDSM as per Senate decision of 331st meeting of 4th May
2017.
5. Rules guiding assessment of publications and
award of points (for Content)

• The assessment of the published material is done by an internal

reviewer who is competent in his/her area of specialization for
non-professorial ranks and by both internal and external
reviewers for professorial ranks.

• The external assessor should be from outside Tanzania and should

not have a close working/social relationship with the candidate.

• The general regulation is that the reviewer/evaluator should be at

least one rank higher than that of the person being reviewed.
 5. Rules guiding assessment of publications and award of points
(for Content)

• Assessment of the publication is done in relation to: (i) Coverage of

subject matter (ii) Originality (iii) Contribution to knowledge (iv) Relevance
to academic discipline (v) Relevance to individual’s own specialization in
an academic discipline (vi) Presentation (vii) Overall quality.

• For each aspect (i) to (vii) above, a grade should be given according to the
following grading system: “A = Excellent, B+ = Very Good, B = Good, C =
Poor, and D = Very Poor”.

• However, for the overall quality of the publication in section (vii) above,
the grade should reflect the average of a (i) to a (vi) above.
 5. Rules guiding assessment of publications and award of points
(for Content)

• The rule requires that one must attain certain number of

points from publications to qualify for promotion from one
rank to another.

• However, the grading of publication is done using letters.

• This therefore requires a conversion of such letter grades into

points. The conversion is done as provided in the table
below:-
 5. Rules guiding assessment of publications and award of points
(for Content)
Types of Publications and their Weighting
Types of Publications and their Weighting
• Dissertations/Theses - N.A • Lower level Books - 0 – 0.5
• Research Reports - N.A • Case Reports - 0 – 0.5
• Conference Papers - 0 – 0.5 • Subject and General
• Consultancy Reports - 0 – 0.5 Dictionaries - 0 – 6.0
• Technical Notices - N.A • Letters in Dictionaries - 0 – 1.0
• Published Book Reviews - 0 – • Co-authored Papers - 0 – 1.0
0.5
• Journal Articles -
• Extension Materials - 0 – 0.5
0 – 1.0
• Scholarly Books - 0 – 6.0 • Editorship - N.A
• Chapters in a Book - 0 – 1.0 • Patents - 0 – 6.0
 Points required for promotion to various academic ranks

5. Rules guiding assessment and promotion…

No. Position Qualifications

1. Tutorial assistant First degree at first or upper

second division with a GPA of 3.8
or above.
2. Tutorial assistant Masters degree with a B+
to assistant performance or GPA of 4.0 and
lecturer above, potentially good
academically.
3. Assistant A PhD degree.
lecturer
 5. Rules guiding assessment and promotion…
Points required for promotion to various academic ranks
No. Position Qualifications
3. Assistant Lecturer (a) Promotion from Assistant Lecturer/Assistant Librarian to
/ assistant Lecturer/Librarian requires possession of a PhD or
Librarian to MMed/MDent for Assistant Lecturers who are also
lecturer/Librarian clinicians.
Some two years back, there was a window for promotion
based on publications as below (now is not there):

(b) For Assistant Lecturers/Assistant Librarians on PhD training,

promotion to the next rank requires a good progress report
on the PhD program and at least 1 point from papers
published in recognised peer reviewed journals, 1 point
from teaching and at least three years of service as
Assistant Lecturer/Assistant Librarian.
(c) For Assistant Lectures/ Assistant Librarians who are not on
PhD training, at least 2 points from papers published in
recognized peer reviewed journals, 1 point from teaching
and at least three years of service as Assistant
Lecturer/Assistant Librarian.
4. Lecturer/Librarian to (a) Promotion from Lecturer/Librarian to Senior Lecturer/Senior Librarian
Senior requires a PhD, a minimum of three years since the last promotion, at least
Lecturer/Senior 3 points from publications and 2 points from teaching.
Librarian
(b) For academic staff who are clinicians, promotion from Lecturer to
Senior Lecturer requires possession of a PhD or MMed/MDent, a minimum
of three years since the last promotion, at least 3 points from publications
and 2 points from teaching.
5.
Senior Candidates should have: (a) A minimum of three years since last
Lecturer/Senior promotion (b) At least 6.0 points from publications since last promotion
Librarian to and 2 points from teaching. (c) Papers should be in international journals
Associate only
Professor/Associate
Library Professor

6. Associate Candidates should have: (a) A minimum of three years since last
Professor/Associate promotion (b) At least 7.0 points from publications since last promotion
Library Professor to and 2 points from teaching. (c) Papers should be in international journals
Professor/Library only
Professor
5. Rules guiding assessment and promotion…

 Balance between various types of scholarly works:

• Teaching effectiveness and publications should be evaluated

separately and awarded points and weights.

• In order to merit promotion, the candidate should attain at

least the minimum number of points required for both
teaching and publications separately.
5. Rules guiding assessment and promotion…
Balance between various types of scholarly works
 6. Conclusion

 Publications in one journal outlet should not exceed 50% of the papers for
promotion
 It is possible for a staff to use only journal papers and earn required points
for promotion – This is because while journal papers have minimum points
in balancing types of scholarly works, other works such as books, book
chapters, consultancy etc have maximum points to contribute for
promotion.
 Promotion for professorial ranks require that all journal papers are
published in international journals.
 Promotion for non-professorial ranks require local journals but staff can use
journal papers in international journals for this rank as well.
 Submissions for publications should be channeled both to content and
media assessment.
Thank YOU!
DISCUSSION
Q&A