- University evaluation agencies, with ANECA and CNEAI at the forefront, assess research, teaching, knowledge transfer and management to regulate academic careers and six-year research periods.
- The CNEAI, ACADEMIA and PEP programs structure the evaluation of teaching staff for research periods, access to teaching bodies and contractual figures.
- The six-year periods recognize six-year periods of research or knowledge transfer activity and result in additional pay and professional prestige.
- Impact factors, quartiles, citations, indexes, and other quality indicators are essential to adequately document the merits required by the calls for proposals.
La evaluation of research activity and accreditation The role of the teaching staff has become a key element of the academic career in Spain. Anyone who wants to secure a permanent position at the university, progress towards university teaching positions, or improve their salary must, without exception, deal with terms such as six-year research periods, research increments, accreditation for tenure or professorship, and with well-known acronyms such as ANECA, CNEAI, ACADEMIA, or PEP.
In this context, understanding what is evaluated, who evaluates it, and how are merits accredited? It is essential for planning a teaching and research career with some common sense and avoiding haphazard approaches. Throughout this article, we will detail the functions of the main agencies, the role of the six-year research periods, the relationship between evaluation and salary supplements, and what resources exist for identifying the famous "indicators of quality" that carry so much weight in these evaluations.
What is the evaluation of research activity and what is it for?
When discussing the evaluation of research activity in the Spanish university system, the main reference is to the process by which research is recognized. research or transfer phasesThese are popularly known as six-year periods of research activity, evaluated by a specific committee, and, if the result is positive, they entitle the researcher to a salary supplement linked to research productivity.
This evaluation is primarily aimed at university faculty and research staff belonging to the scientific ranks of public research bodies of the General State Administration. That is, it not only affects those in universities, but also scientific personnel of organizations such as the CSIC and other public research centers.
The recognition of six-year research periods is closely linked to academic careers, because a very important part of internal promotion, access to permanent positions, and obtaining certain salary supplements depends on it. demonstrate a solid research track recordHence, for many teachers and researchers, the evaluation of research activity is almost as important as the scientific output itself.
Furthermore, the six-year evaluation structure introduces a medium-term planning logic: researchers organize their agenda of publications, projects and transfer with this in mind the reference periods which will then be examined. This makes evaluation an element that conditions practices, publication rates and, in general, the way we understand academic productivity.
The National Commission for the Evaluation of Research Activity (CNEAI)
The body specifically responsible for evaluating research and transfer phases is the National Commission for the Evaluation of Research Activity (CNEAI)This commission functions as the Six-Year Research Unit within the National Agency for Quality Assessment and Accreditation (ANECA) and assumes responsibility for examining applications submitted by university professors and scientific staff of public research bodies.
The CNEAI analyzes the activity carried out during a specific period (usually six consecutive years) and decides whether that trajectory merits recognition for a research or knowledge transfer period. The ultimate goal is for those who pass the evaluation to receive recognition. productivity supplement which is popularly known as a six-year term. This supplement has a direct impact on payroll and also on academic prestige.
The committee structures its work into different areas of evaluation, adapting the criteria to the specific characteristics of each field of knowledge. Even so, in general terms, considerable attention is paid to aspects such as publications in high-impact journals, citations received, contributions to relevant conferences, reference monographs, and knowledge transfer resultsIn recent years, moreover, the assessment of more diverse indicators has been gaining ground, especially in the area of transfer.
The CNEAI acts as the investigating body for the six-year research periods (sexenios), proposing positive or negative evaluation resolutions. These calls for applications are usually published with a very specific schedule, with an application period that opens and closes on specific dates, so it is vital for teachers to pay attention to the official resolutions and the deadlines that are set each academic year.
ANECA: the state agency for evaluation, quality and accreditation
La National Agency for Quality Assessment and Accreditation (ANECA) It is an autonomous body attached to the Ministry of Science, Innovation and Universities. It was created from the transformation of the former ANECA foundation into a public body, as established by Law 15/2014, on the rationalization of the Public Sector and other administrative reform measures. Its central mission is to contribute to improving the quality of the higher education system through processes of evaluation, certification, and accreditation of programs, faculty, and institutions.
In the specific field of university teaching staff, ANECA develops several fundamental lines of work: evaluation of research activity (through the CNEAI), accreditation for access to university teaching positions and evaluation for contractual positionsAll of this is framed within the objectives of continuous improvement, alignment with the European Higher Education Area (EHEA) and promotion of a coherent model of teaching and research career.
In compliance with current regulations on university faculty, ANECA's evaluation programs assess the merits of research, teaching, knowledge transfer and academic managementThese programs are the gateway to many teaching positions, both tenured and contracted, and also determine access to certain salary supplements associated with the quality of the activity performed.
In addition to evaluating faculty, ANECA develops strategic plans to strengthen the transparency and quality of the system, such as the Action Plan 2024-2027 within the framework of COARAThis aligns with European recommendations on research assessment reform. All of this aims to make accreditation and evaluation processes increasingly clear, internationally comparable, and less dependent on a single indicator.
Teacher evaluation programs: CNEAI, ACADEMIA and PEP
To channel the different evaluation methods, ANECA has structured its operations into several specific programs that cover different stages of an academic career. Each program focuses on a professional profile and uses a weighted assessment system. academic and scientific merits tailored to that profile.
The first is the aforementioned program of CNEAIThis process focuses exclusively on evaluating research activity for the purpose of awarding six-year research periods (sexenios). In this case, research merits, and increasingly knowledge transfer merits, are examined to grant research or transfer periods that include salary supplements. This is not an accreditation for accessing a position, but rather a recognition of productivity within a position already held.
The program ACADEMYFor its part, it carries out the curriculum evaluation necessary to obtain accreditation for access to university teaching positions as Associate Professor and Full Professor. This evaluation considers the merits of research, teaching, knowledge transfer, and university administration. Obtaining this accreditation is an essential prerequisite for applying for Associate or Full Professor positions at public universities.
The program PEP The Faculty Evaluation Program (PEP) is aimed at those aspiring to tenured faculty positions, such as Tenured Lecturer, Private University Professor, and Assistant Professor. In this case, the evaluation focuses on academic qualifications, research activity, and teaching experience, adjusting the criteria to the level of each category. Without a positive PEP evaluation, it is very difficult to obtain these tenured positions on a competitive basis.
Taken together, these programs allow for the articulation of a staggered academic careerFrom entry-level assistant professors to senior faculty, they guarantee a certain standard of quality in research, teaching, and knowledge transfer, aligned with the requirements of the Spanish university system and the European Higher Education Area (EHEA) framework.
Six-year research periods, research increments and salary supplements
The so-called six-year periods are, in essence, six-year periods of research or transfer activity which have been positively evaluated by the CNEAI. Each recognized level translates into a productivity bonus that is added to the base salary and other remuneration items of the teaching or research staff.
The logic behind this system is simple: it aims to incentivize a quality scientific and knowledge transfer productionrewarding those who maintain a sustained career trajectory over time. The existence of several cumulative milestones throughout their careers gives faculty members incentives to continue publishing, leading projects, and generating relevant results even after achieving job security.
In the case of tenured university professors, there is also the possibility of requesting the validation of positive evaluations of research activity periods that were recognized before entering public service. In other words, if someone obtained recognition of a six-year research period while in another professional situation, they can request that it be validated once they join a university teaching staff.
For tenured lecturers, universities with a current agreement with ANECA can submit applications for the evaluation of research periods for their tenured and temporary lecturers. In these cases, coordination between the university and the evaluation agency is essential. the deadlines, the documentation and the criteria are applied correctly.
In addition to the state-level six-year terms, many universities have developed their own salary supplements linked to internal evaluationsThese assessments are sometimes based on the same documentation or on evaluations previously carried out by ANECA. In this way, research and knowledge transfer activities are playing an increasingly important role in the overall salary structure of faculty.
University evaluation agencies: ANECA and ACCUA
The responsibility for evaluating research activity, accrediting teaching staff, and recognizing professional development periods rests with a group of university evaluation agencies which operate at different levels: state and regional. Although each has its own responsibilities, they share the goal of promoting the quality of the university and scientific system.
At the national level, ANECA acts as the reference agency. It is responsible for the evaluation, certification, and accreditation activities of the Spanish university system with the aim of to promote its continuous improvement and adaptation to the EHEATheir teacher evaluation programs (CNEAI, ACADEMIA, PEP) are the backbone of a large part of the academic career throughout the State.
At the regional level there are their own agencies, such as the Agency for Scientific and University Quality of Andalusia (ACCUA)This agency was created with the aim of promoting the quality of the Andalusian Knowledge System in accordance with international scientific and academic standards, providing universities, higher education centers, research institutions and other agents of the Andalusian system with the quality criteria and references they need to fulfill their social function.
Among ACCUA's objectives is the identification and consolidation of best practices in the processes of evaluating and accrediting scientific and university quality. This aims to ensure that decisions regarding faculty, training programs, and higher education institutions are based on consistent, transparent, and comparable criteria.
The network of state and regional agencies creates a system in which quality and accountability are paramount. For teachers, this means having to meet requirements defined by both ANECA and, where applicable, by the agency of their autonomous community, if one exists, thus coordinating multiple evaluation processes throughout his professional career.
Evaluation, accreditation and access to university teaching positions
The evaluation of research activity is closely linked to the processes of accreditation for access to university teaching positionsIn order to compete for positions as a Tenured University Professor or University Professor in public institutions, it is essential to have prior accreditation issued by ANECA or another recognized agency.
In this field, the ACADEMIA program plays an essential role, as it analyzes the curricular merits of research, teaching, management, and knowledge transfer to determine whether a person is qualified to access these teaching positions. The evaluation is based on a scale that considers high-impact publications, proven teaching experience, participation in competitive projects, transfer activities, and university management responsibilities, among other elements.
In parallel, the PEP program handles accreditation for contractual positions such as Contracted PhD Professor, Assistant PhD Professor, or Private University Professor. Although the level of rigor may differ from that of ACADEMIA, the process is similar: research and teaching merits are evaluated, in addition to accredited academic qualifications, to determine whether the applicant meets the required standards.
The recognition of research or transfer periods and the accreditation for access to university teaching positions They are, therefore, intimately connected. Both processes are managed by university evaluation agencies and determine both career progression and faculty remuneration, contributing to a model in which external evaluation and transparency are gaining importance.
Furthermore, some universities conduct additional curriculum evaluations for the awarding of their own salary supplements, which are added to those recognized by state or regional agencies. This means that for the same teaching-research profile, several layers of evaluation intersect, all of them based on criteria for scientific, teaching and transfer quality.
Quality indicators, impact indices, and other key indicators
One of the points that generates the most doubts for teachers is how to demonstrate that their scientific and transfer output meets the required quality indicators by the agencies. These indicators are quantitative and qualitative evidence that the publications, projects, and results have a relevant impact on the academic community and society.
Among the most common indicators are the following: impact factors of key scientific journalsThese data are typically compiled in international databases. A journal's position within its field (quartiles) serves to assess the competitiveness of the articles published in it. A journal in the first quartile, for example, is generally considered to have a higher relative impact within its area.
Attention is also paid to the number of appointments received The publications themselves are important because they indicate the extent to which the academic community uses and recognizes them. In parallel, the h-index has become a widely used benchmark for simultaneously measuring the quantity of output and its impact in terms of citations.
Beyond journal articles, other formats are valued, such as books and chapters published by prestigious publishers, patents, technology transfer agreements, technological developments, impact reports, and much more. In all cases, the goal is to demonstrate with verifiable evidence that the output has a scientific, technical or social relevance significant.
To facilitate this task, some universities and library services develop guides and resources that explain how to locate impact factors, quartiles, citations, indexes, and other indicators. These guides help faculty members properly document the merits they will present to different evaluation and accreditation processes, avoiding errors that could negatively impact the outcome.
Other areas of action of ANECA in the evaluation of teachers
In addition to accreditation programs and the evaluation of six-year research periods, ANECA carries out other activities curriculum evaluation related to the academic career and the funding of research talent. Among these, the evaluations of applications for state funding for training and mobility stand out.
Specifically, ANECA evaluates, on behalf of the ministry responsible for universities, the applications submitted to the calls for University Teaching Staff Training Grants (FPU)These grants are one of the main pathways to doctoral studies and the first teaching experiences in the Spanish university system, which is why the evaluation process is especially rigorous.
Similarly, the agency participates in the evaluation of applications from Mobility Subprogram Integrated into the State Program for the Promotion of Talent and its Employability, these grants aim to encourage stays at national and international research centers, which in turn contributes to improving the research experience of the beneficiaries and strengthening the internationalization of the university system.
This entire set of assessments is integrated into a broader strategy whose objective is to promote the development of a coherent academic careerFrom the initial steps as trainees to the highest levels of teaching and research responsibility, consistency between the criteria used in the different phases is crucial to providing a degree of predictability to those building their academic profile.
In parallel, ANECA continues to review and update its procedures to adapt them to regulatory changes, European recommendations and the demands of the academic community, seeking a reasonable balance between rigor, transparency and recognition of the diversity of career paths.
In this scenario, understanding how the evaluation of research activity, accreditation and six-year research periods It allows university faculty and research staff to better plan their careers, select with discernment where to publish, how to document their merits and which promotion paths are most suitable for them, reducing the uncertainty that usually accompanies these processes.
