UGC Care list Journal Parameters
Beyond the CARE List: Understanding UGC’s New Suggestive Parameters for Journal Evaluation
For years, the UGC-CARE list served as a primary reference point for evaluating the quality of peer-reviewed journals in India. However, in a move aimed at decentralizing and refining the journal assessment process, the University Grants Commission (UGC) has discontinued the UGC-CARE list. In its place, the UGC has introduced a set of suggestive parameters that Higher Educational Institutions (HEIs) are encouraged to use for evaluating peer-reviewed journals.
This shift empowers HEIs to take greater ownership of journal evaluation, fostering a more nuanced approach tailored to specific disciplines and institutional contexts. The UGC’s framework outlines eight broad criteria, providing a robust starting point for internal evaluation committees within HEIs.
The UGC explicitly encourages HEIs to establish their own internal committees to refine and adapt these parameters to best suit their needs and academic focus. This allows for flexibility while maintaining a standard baseline for quality assessment.
Let’s delve into some of the key areas covered by these new suggestive parameters, as outlined by the UGC:
Key Suggestive Parameters Outlined by UGC:
The UGC’s framework covers multiple dimensions of a journal’s operations and quality. While a total of eight criteria have been proposed, the provided details highlight several crucial aspects:
- Journal Preliminary Criteria: These are fundamental requirements for a journal to be considered credible.
- ISSN: Possession of a valid International Standard Serial Number (Print or Online).
- Regular Publication: Adherence to a consistent and stated publication schedule.
- Peer Review: Implementation of a transparent and rigorous peer-review process for all submissions.
- Website: Presence on a certified, secure, and accessible domain with clear journal information.
- Open Access Policy: Clear declaration of its open access policy or subscription model.
- Repositories: Integration or indexing with established national or international repositories (e.g., DOAJ, PubMed Central where applicable, or national archives).
- Editorial Board Criteria: The composition and expertise of the editorial board are critical indicators of a journal’s standing and peer-review quality.
- Composition Details: Availability of detailed information about editorial board members, including their affiliations and qualifications.
- Relevant Expertise: The board should comprise members with demonstrated expertise relevant to the journal’s subject areas.
- Transparency: Transparency regarding the editorial board’s roles, responsibilities, and any potential conflicts of interest.
- Editorial Policy: The clarity and integrity of a journal’s operational policies reflect its professionalism and ethical standards.
- Scope and Objectives: Clearly articulated aims, objectives, and thematic scope of the journal.
- Subject Areas: Precise definition of the specific subject domains covered by the journal.
- Fee Disclosure: Complete transparency regarding Article Processing Charges (APCs) or any other publication fees.
- Acceptance Rates & Schedule: Disclosure of manuscript acceptance rates and publication schedules to manage author expectations.
This framework provides HEIs with a structured approach to evaluating journals, moving beyond a single prescribed list to a more dynamic and institutionally-driven process.
Summary of Key Parameters
Here is a table summarizing the parameters detailed above:
| Criterion | Key Aspects Covered |
|---|---|
| Journal Preliminary | Valid ISSN, Regularity, Transparent Peer Review, Secure Website, Clear Access Policy, Repository Integration |
| Editorial Board | Detailed Composition, Relevant Expertise, Transparency |
| Editorial Policy | Clear Scope/Objectives, Defined Subject Areas, Fee Transparency, Acceptance/Schedule Disclosure |
By implementing these and other not-yet-detailed criteria (part of the total eight), HEIs can establish robust mechanisms to ensure that the research output published in journals contributes meaningfully to academic knowledge and maintains high standards of integrity. The success of this new approach hinges on the proactive engagement of HEIs in establishing and refining their internal evaluation processes.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
- Q1: Has the UGC-CARE list been completely abolished?
- Yes, the UGC-CARE list has been discontinued. The UGC has introduced these new suggestive parameters for HEIs to use instead.
- Q2: Are these new parameters mandatory for all HEIs?
- The parameters are suggestive. The UGC encourages HEIs to use them as a basis and establish internal committees to refine them, allowing for adaptation to individual institutional needs and disciplines.
- Q3: How do these parameters help in evaluating journal quality?
- These parameters shift the focus from a static list to evaluating fundamental aspects like the journal’s operational transparency, integrity of its peer-review process, expertise of its editorial body, and adherence to publication ethics, providing a more dynamic and comprehensive assessment framework.
