Evaluation

The Science Evaluation Commission will conduct an evaluation based on information regarding the artistic activities of all employees engaged in scientific work and included in the N count in the artistic discipline of visual arts and art conservation.

The evaluation will also take into account the artistic achievements of students enrolled in the Doctoral School of the Academy of Fine Arts in Kraków who have prepared a doctoral dissertation in the artistic discipline of visual arts and art conservation.

KEN will evaluate the Academy’s artistic activities based on the data contained in the POL-on system as of December 31, 2025.

• The number N is determined as the arithmetic mean of the number of employees in each year of the 2022–2025 period, converted to full-time equivalents and taking into account the proportion of working time devoted to conducting research in that discipline, as of December 31 of each year covered by the evaluation.
• The number of artistic achievements authored or co-authored by each person included in the group of N or enrolled in a doctoral program and preparing a doctoral dissertation may not exceed 4.
• In the case of artistic co-authorship, this achievement is counted toward the individual’s total number of achievements as the quotient of 1 and the number of co-authors, rounded to two decimal places.
• During the evaluation, KEN may request that the entity being evaluated submit specified documents in paper or electronic form in order to establish the facts and verify the information contained in the POL-on system.

The basic evaluation criteria in the artistic discipline of visual arts and art conservation are:

I. Artistic quality of the activities conducted – 80%

II. The Impact of Research Activities on the Functioning of Society and the Economy – 20%

I. ARTISTIC LEVEL OF ACTIVITIES
The types of artistic achievements taken into account in assessing the artistic level under this criterion are specified in Table 3 of Annex 1 to the Regulation of the Minister of Science and Higher Education of February 22, 2019, on the evaluation of the quality of scientific activity, as amended.
Each artistic achievement will be evaluated by two experts, and the rating for a given artistic achievement will be the arithmetic mean of the ratings awarded.

II. DESCRIPTION OF IMPACT
The assessment of the impact of artistic activity on the functioning of society and the economy is conducted on the basis of the relationship between the results of artistic activity and the economy, the functioning of public administration, health care, culture and the arts, environmental protection, national security and defense, or other factors influencing the civilizational development of society.
Impact descriptions are prepared (in Polish and English) based on evidence of such impact, e.g., reports, opinions, recommendations from external institutions, scientific publications, and citations in other documents or publications. Evidence of impact—no more than 5 items per impact description—is uploaded to the information and communication technology system provided by the ministry as separate files saved in one of the following formats: .pdf, .mp3, .mp4, .mpeg4, or .avi. The size of a single file may not exceed 500 megabytes.

When assessing impact, artistic activities carried out during the evaluation period or prior to that period—but completed no earlier than 2002—are taken into account, provided that evidence of that impact was generated during the evaluation period.

An evaluated entity with a value of N:
1) not greater than 100.00 – submits 2 impact descriptions for evaluation;
2) ranging from 100.01 to 200.00 – submits 3 impact descriptions for evaluation;
3) ranging from 200.01 to 300.00 – submits 4 impact descriptions for evaluation;
4) greater than 300.00 – submits 5 impact descriptions for evaluation.

As part of the assessment of the impactofscientificactivityon society and the economy, points are awarded for:
1) scope of impact:
a) 50 points – for impact with international scope,
b) 40 points – for an impact with national scope,
c) 30 points – for an impact with regional scope,
d) 20 points – for a description of an impact with local scope,
e) 0 points – in the case of an impact of marginal scope, or when the description of the impact was prepared based on evidence of impact that does not demonstrate any connection between the results of scientific research or development work, or scientific activity in the field of artistic creation, and the economy, the functioning of public administration, health care, culture and the arts, environmental protection, national security and defense, or other factors influencing the civilizational development of society;

2) significance of the impact:
a) 50 points – in the case of a groundbreaking impact,
b) 25 points – in the case of a significant impact,
c) 10 points – in the case of a limited impact,
d) 0 points – in the case of an impact of negligible significance, or when the description of the impact was prepared on the basis of evidence of impact that does not demonstrate any connection between the results of scientific research, development work, or scientific activity in the field of artistic creation and the economy, the functioning of public administration, health care, culture and the arts, environmental protection, national security and defense, or other factors influencing the civilizational development of society.”

Assessment of the impact statement:

1.  is the sum of the points awarded to the impact description for the scope of impact and the significance of impact,
2. is 0 points—if the impact description is awarded 0 points for the scope of impact or for the significance of impact,
3. is 0 points—if the description of the impact has no connection to the scientific research or development work conducted at the evaluated institution within a given scientific discipline,
4. is 0 points for each missing impact description—if fewer impact descriptions are submitted for evaluation than required by the regulations.

The number of points awarded as part of the impact assessment may be increased by 20 if the interdisciplinary nature of the research or development work was crucial to the achievement of that impact.

Each impact description will be evaluated by two experts, one of whom will serve as the lead expert. The lead expert, in collaboration with the other expert, will determine the evaluation (score) of the impact description and provide a justification for it. The final evaluation score for the evaluated entity under this evaluation criterion will be determined as the arithmetic mean of the scores for the individual impact descriptions.

By July 31, 2026, the Minister of Science and Higher Education will issue a decision regarding the assignment of a scientific category: A+, A, B+, B, or C.

Emanuel Kulczycki's website features a report on the pilot program for social impact assessment procedures.