Profesor Asistente | Clasificación Docente

Assistant Professor Requirements

BASIC ARTICLES

ARTICLE 8.1

8.1 Hold a graduate degree.

Description

Given the importance Tecnológico de Monterrey places on the quality of its faculty’s academic credentials, it has established guidelines to guarantee the delivery of high-quality education and the institutional commitment established with accrediting agencies: Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges (SACSCOC) and the Federation of Mexican Private Higher Education Institutions (Spanish acronym: FIMPES).

This article requires the submission of evidence that the candidate holds a graduate degree, which can be done simply by submitting the classification CV, as all degrees held are entered therein. A PDF scan of the graduate degree may also be submitted as evidence provided that this is officially valid in our country.

Reference

FORM 8.1

Evaluation

Example

Example 8.1

ARTICLE 8.2

8.2 Have complied, over the past three years, with the academic teaching load guidelines established by the Institution, meeting the minimum academic operation requirements: attendance, punctuality, submission of grades, time and availability to support students (advising and counseling), in any of the formats in which courses are offered.

Description

The impact professors have on their students is of great importance to our institution. This article requires the submission of evidence of collaboration with the institution as a professor over the last three years and compliance with the minimum requirements of academic operation during this period of time: attendance, punctuality, delivery of grades, and time and availability to provide student attention (counseling and orientation) in any of the formats in which the courses are taught.

A letter from the regional department director must be submitted to comply with this requirement, explicitly entering the academic workload assigned to the candidate over the previous three years, indicating that there was compliance with the aforesaid requirements and expressing support for the application submitted. The letter must be formal with a letterhead, signed, and dated recently (November or January). If the candidate was not assigned the expected academic workload for their position in any given semester, the reason for this must be explained in the letter (in the event of the regional department director not having held the position for the previous three years, this must also be explained, and the professor may submit other additional evidence, such as a letter from the division director or similar).

Reference

Format 8.2

Evaluation

Example

Example 8.2

ARTICLE 8.3

8.3 Have taught courses over the past three years at the Institution and have been a full-time professor for at least one semester.

Description

This article requires the submission of evidence of having worked as an undergraduate and graduate professor during the previous three years. This collaboration may have been as a lecturer provided that the candidate was contracted as a full-time professor (on an indefinite basis) for at least one semester either as a Professor, Research-Oriented Professor, or Academic Director.

Lecturing professors do not follow the same career development path; consequently, even though some may work as admissions or program directors, the classification process does not apply to this position.

In the case of new (recently hired) professors at Tecnológico de Monterrey who wish to validate their career or a classification obtained at another institution, the process specified in Article 5 of the Classification Regulations applies.

Reference

Format 8.3

Evaluation

Example

Example 8.3

ARTICLE 8.4

8.4 Demonstrate proficiency in the English language (B2 level in the Common European Framework of Reference or its equivalent), through tests or accreditations recognized by the Institution for this purpose. In the case of faculty who deliver courses in English, this requirement is deemed to be fulfilled. Faculty with at least a B1 level can attach, for the committee’s consideration, evidence of international career activities that demonstrate
their language proficiency.

Description

The Institution wants its professors to develop in an international setting with far-reaching impacts overseas and to enrich their knowledge by having them participate in collaborative networks with colleagues from internationally prestigious institutions.

Professors’ professional development is furthered by the provision of courses, experiences, and support to strengthen their linguistic and multicultural competencies.

This article requires evidence to be submitted by means of:

a) A standardized examination

The following is a list of examinations approved by the institution:

Evidence must be submitted of at least B2 proficiency in English (CEFR: Common European Framework of Reference) or its equivalent as validated by one of the examinations approved by the institution. The classification CV can provide evidence if there is a record of the test result in the “English (SACS)” field. This record may be requested from CEDDIE or a PDF scan of the test result slip may be submitted.

b) Achieving a minimum of B1 (CEFR) and submitting evidence of international work or collaborations (publications or project reports in English, collaboration in international conferences held in English, etc.).

The following is a list of examinations approved by the institution:

equivalencias

c) Teaching subjects in English for more than one semester at Tecnológico de Monterrey. The evidence submitted must show that the course was taught in English; for example, a PDF file with a screenshot featuring the corresponding course attribute (ENGLISH), payroll receipt with payment for teaching in English, a course overview in Canvas, etc.

Note. For further information about test centers, please visit the following sites:

Test centers at the Tec

https://sites.google.com/tec.mx/catalogodecertificacionestec/centros-en-el-tec-de-monterrey/ingl%C3%A9s-tec

External test centers

https://sites.google.com/tec.mx/catalogodecertificacionestec/centros-externos/ingl%C3%A9s-externo

Reference

Format 8.4

Evaluation

Example

Example 8.4

TEACHING ARTICLES

ARTICLE 9.1

9.1 Have a weighted average numerical grade of 8.5 in the Student Opinion Survey (ECOA, in Spanish), over the past three years. If their weighted average is less than 8.0, they can present complementary evidence of their teaching practice.

Description

The Student Opinion Survey (Spanish acronym: ECOA) is an instrument that captures students’ collective opinion of a course and the professor. Its results provide relevant information and can help professors recognize strengths and areas of opportunity to improve their teaching and interaction with students.

The annual weighted average of the ECOA is added to the professor’s classification CV. Weighting is done based on the number of students involved:

The evaluation obtained from each course is multiplied by the number of students who took the course.
All the multiplication results are added together.
The number of students who took all courses is calculated.
The total obtained in point 2 is divided by the total obtained in point 3.

As of the 2024-2025 call, a single comprehensive ECOA calculation is performed for the previous 3 years. EVAp [Spanish acronym: Overall, my learning experience with the teacher was...] is considered for courses taught following the 2019 syllabus in the evaluation; the REC indicator [Spanish acronym: Would you recommend a friend to take classes with this teacher?] is contemplated for ECOAs concerning course plans prior to 2019.

The assistant category requires a weighted average of 8.5 or higher. In the event of the weighted three-year average being at least 8.0, supplementary evidence may be submitted providing relevant information about your teaching practice. The following are examples of this:

a) A letter containing net positive mentions in ECAG in at least three of the previous six semesters. This letter may be obtained at ECOA&ECAG&ProfInspira › ECOA.
Each person must use their institutional credentials to review the information (the net number is calculated to be the difference between the number of “best teacher” minus the number of “worst teacher” mentions).

b) Justification letter (with supporting evidence) in the event of there being any particular special circumstance that has had a negative impact on ECOA evaluations.

c) Reflective essay on teaching practice, explaining improvements that have been made (with supporting evidence).

You can review aspects to be considered when writing the essay here.

Reference

Format 9.1

Evaluation

merci-91e

Example

Example 9.1

ARTICLE 9.2

9.2 Demonstrate a total of 40 hours per year, on average, of teaching training during the past three years, in the offering of teacher development, classroom wellbeing, diversity and inclusion, and other courses that demonstrate the development of their characteristics as Tecnológico de Monterrey professors.

Description

Our institution considers it essential to help teachers achieve teaching excellence; consequently, we expect an ongoing commitment from each and every one of them to develop their skills, knowledge, and enrich their teaching practice all the while seeking to successfully implement the various elements of the institution’s educational model. The institution offers a range of training, mentoring programs, workshops, and development experiences, all available to help Tecnológico de Monterrey faculty members flourish as they grow in the institution. The development model and courses offered can be consulted at https://ceddie.tec.mx/.

Currently, there is a need for constant development of teaching skills such as course and lesson planning, sharing or implementation of learning experiences, educational assessment, and other areas related to the wellbeing of teachers and students. It is important to ensure that all teachers have the support and preparation to deal constructively with challenges that may arise in the classroom.

Ongoing development and strengthening of teaching competencies enables teachers to contribute to their students’ success, optimize learning outcomes within the framework of our educational model, and make use of the vast institutional learning resources available to them.

Required evidence may be an entry in the classification CV or take the form of the CEDDIE training Kardex or other training certificates issued by relevant educational institutions (e.g. Coursera Certificate in Pedagogy, Google Educator Certificate, etc.).

External evidence must be provided by a third party; in this case, the institution, association or organization that provided the training. Care should be taken that dates and classification periods coincide and that the submitted evidence specifies the number of hours dedicated and briefly contextualizes the content, noting how it is related to teacher development, classroom wellbeing, diversity and inclusion, in addition to other courses that evidence professional development (inspirational, innovative, up-to-date in the discipline, linked to the environment, and user of technology in teaching practice) as a professor at Tecnológico de Monterrey.

Occasionally, certificates may not specify the official length of the course in hours. In these cases, arguments may be given, supported, for example, by the course syllabus or a MOOC screenshot describing the course and specifying its length in hours.

Evidence of an average total of 40 hours per year over the previous three years must be provided, i.e., evidence of at least 120 total hours over the three-year period. A table may be added summarizing courses and hours (indicating that these are documented in SSFF, in the classification CV, or if they are external certificates).

It is important to point out that evidence of professional discipline updating on different topics can be found in another article pertaining to intellectual vitality.

Reference

Format 9.2

Evaluation

Example

Example 9.2

ARTICLE 9.3

9.3 Incorporate into their teaching practice, over the past three years, the use of digital tools for education to facilitate the teaching-learning process. Evidence of at least two implementations in their classes is required.

Description

Digital education in the Tecnológico de Monterrey educational model seeks to enrich students’ learning experiences through an educational ecosystem involving the use of innovative teaching methods and digital educational tools.

Digital education tools or tools for digital education are applications or software that run on computers or electronic devices, may or may not connect to the internet, and are used for educational purposes. They enable teachers to offer their students an enriched, flexible, interactive, and/or tailor-made educational experience. Professors are expected to integrate these tools into their teaching to facilitate certain aspects of teaching or student learning. Compliance with this criterion is demonstrated with evidence of two of these tools being used in one of their courses.

Integrating digital tools to facilitate the learning-teaching process is necessary in today’s changing and digitized world. Today’s students are not very attracted to traditional learning models in which professors lecture and students listen, take notes and review the textbook, trying to memorize, process and later verify through repetition. Currently, a single course may integrate different digital tools to support and facilitate learning. There are digital tools for giving presentations, setting up active discussions, collaborating, reviewing, studying, giving feedback, practicing, and evaluating (among others). In the modern context, professors have to select the best tools for their classes skillfully and integrate them into an educational package that appeals to their students’ different learning styles. Professors are expected to implement this kind of integration on a regular basis, semester by semester, in all of their subjects, but the submission of two integrations is required: either an illustration or an example.

The evidence to be submitted pursuant to this article should document complete integration in three sections: planning, execution, and evaluation of a digital education tool’s integration. The addition of these three sections demonstrates that the integration was purposeful and completed and that the ongoing improvement cycle was closed. In addition, the evidence should clearly specify the group in question and during which period the integration took place. Two such integrations are requested; consequently, the same tool may be used in two groups in different semesters, or evidence of two different integrations in different training units (TU) may be submitted. It is important to emphasize that tools should favor the learning of course-related topics and not just be used for social interaction (greeting, asking where the class will be, sharing an anecdote, etc.).

The main evidence required pursuant to this article involves the integrations made by professors in their courses. Consequently, the evidence must be generated on the whole by the candidate professor. It should be noted that a letter from the manager in charge of a TU can help to frame the evidence in terms of group, period, and subject, but it should not constitute the main evidence.

It is important to consider that “technological tools” were required in the 2016 regulations, so the integration of analog devices was allowed. The 2023 regulations have focused the requirement on digital education tools.

Examples of digital educational tools

Use of discipline-specific software (Autocad, Flexim, etc.) in one or more course topics to favor the development of graduation competencies.
Use of general tools (Socrative, Kahoot, Mentimeter, TEAMs, Canva, etc.) that facilitate the teaching and learning process by becoming fully integrated in the activity.
Digital tools facilitate teaching and learning in face-to-face or remote sessions and manifest how session participants interact; for example, conduct surveys to check learning, connect by Zoom with students from other groups and create rooms for teamwork to solve cases, problems and challenges, or use the white board to develop an activity where students collaborate, thereby favoring interaction involving the session’s contents.

Solid evidence of having integrated digital education tools to facilitate the teaching-learning process must include documentation of their implementation by showing the planning, execution, and evaluation of integrations in courses taught in the requested period (there may be two in the same course or in different courses). Confirm that the dates of the implementations correspond to the period being evaluated to ensure evidence approval.

Planning can be evidenced with a pre-prepared design (with mentoring from CEDDIE for example) or any other course-planning document demonstrating how the integration was planned. You may also include screenshots of course elements in Canvas where you can view tool planning and integration.

Implementation can be evidenced by labeled photographs, video recordings of (a) learner(s) interacting with the tool, or a copy of a learner’s submission where it is clear that the tool is being used in the learning process. If photographs are used, dates should be provided to relate them to a specific course; even so, the photograph alone does not usually provide conclusive evidence unless the course, the date, and the context are obvious.

It is important to keep in mind that video formats are not accepted as evidence on the classification platform, but it is possible to save screenshots of the video in question and then reference the video from which the screenshot was taken (with the link to the video location).

There are tools specifically designed for the teaching-learning process (e.g. software to practice solving math problems) that would be useful pursuant to this article. Many digital tools may be used in any discipline. However, it is worth mentioning that the use of specialized disciplinary software does not automatically demonstrate its integration in the teaching-learning (TL) process. How the software is being used for the (TL) process must be demonstrated: not just that the students know how to use it.

The evaluation expects evidence to show the considerations given to how each specific tool was used and/or that there is feedback available from students on its use. A formal evaluation of use can also be evidenced by published outcomes, proof of presentation in a forum, or by a document from an internal or external third party that reports, certifies, or gives awards for tool integrations.

Tools

CEDDIE

https://ceddie.tec.mx/es/innovacion-y-tecnologia-educativa

CEDDIE offers advice, tutorials and workshops on digital tool implementation in teaching and learning; it also offers support such as “CEDDIE te pone la App” (CEDDIE gives you the App) and other software license and application access schemes.

EDuTools

https://edutools.tec.mx/es/colecciones

A space where recommendations and descriptions of digital education tool use are provided.

References

Format 9.3

Evaluation

Example

Example 9.3

ARTICLE 9.4

9.4 Implement, over the past three years, educational innovation with the aim of improving the teaching-learning process, documenting an implementation and its impact on their class(es).

Description

Our institution is committed to promoting a culture of experimentation and conscious educational entrepreneurship through an ecosystem of educational innovation that enables professors to reinvent their teaching practice and give added value to their students’ learning processes. Professors are expected to constantly refresh their teaching practice with experimentation and by integrating technological tools through techno-pedagogical decision-making for an innovative classroom experience, by transforming the teaching-learning process with methodologies focused on educational innovation, and by developing original and innovative proposals of high educational value.

Pursuant to this article, submissions should contain the following clear evidence:

the intention to improve the teaching-learning process,
general and particular educational innovation goals (specific and measurable),
the methodology used to conduct the innovation project,
evidence of implementation,
education innovation results aligned with innovation goals, and
course impact assessment.

Professors are expected to integrate an educational innovation activity or a project in which it is apparent that an objective was set to improve a certain aspect of their teaching or their students’ learning process, that its development was methodological, and that a results analysis and impact description were done with regard to the established objectives.

The documentation begins with an explicit definition of the objectives of the educational innovation in a way that allows the results of the innovation to be associated with fulfillment of the course’s education objectives.

Educational innovation results may be manifested as learning. There is not always a positive impact on the first attempt or iteration.

Examples of Educational Innovation goals

Create a space in the metaverse (Virtual Campus) where two class topics may be tackled in real-world contexts. Here, problem-solving activities will enable professors to observe student competence and give them more immediate, meaningful feedback.
Design a new way of addressing given course content (for example, by using a different methodology or integrating technological tools), evaluating the results obtained before and after implementation, and assessing the impact.

The evidence must demonstrate that the professor set forth an educational objective and conducted an analysis and evaluation of results, which must be aligned with the stated objective.

Examples of topics, teaching strategies, and educational technology

Guiding questions

What audience is targeted by the intervention or project?
What is the problem to be solved or the educational process or aspect to be improved for the target audience?
What specific goals does the educational innovation seek in terms of specific, measurable outcomes?
How is it demonstrated that the expected impact was achieved?
Are these results directly related to the goal or the problem posed?
In what way is the proposed intervention or project considered truly innovative?

Support tools

My Educational Innovation

Support tool to generate evidence of Educational Innovation available at MiTEc and:

https://innovation.tec.mx/

iRegister provides support for the documentation of Educational Innovation. It has a guided format and the support of expert advisors in Educational Innovation. When the education innovation project is documented, feedback will be received from an expert, who will provide guidance on how to build up the evidence required herein.

Novus facilitates the obtention of resources to support education innovation projects.

https://novus.tec.mx/es

IFE Conference

Formerly known as CIIE, this is a space for sharing experiences, projects and research results related to educational innovation. This forum is one way of transferring educational innovations.

https://ciie.itesm.mx/es/

CEDDIE

https://ceddie.tec.mx/es/innovacion-y-tecnologia-educativa

CEDDIE offers consulting services concerning how to select methodologies for outcome follow-up and documentation; demos, workshops and consulting services to learn about teaching strategies, in addition to educational and emerging technologies.

Reference

Format 9.4

Evaluation

Example

Example 9.4

INTELLECTUAL VITALITY ARTICLES

ARTICLE 10.1

10.1 Demonstrate up-to-date knowledge aligned with their disciplinary area over the last three years with at least 72 total hours participating in any of the following options:

(a) Training, including courses, workshops, diplomas, webinars, seminars, artistic or disciplinary clinics, and courses that are part of academic degrees.

(b) Current certification or re-certification by an accredited professional body.

(d) Participation as an attendee in conferences, congresses, conventions, or seminars.

Description

It is essential to our institution that professors constantly update their knowledge in their specialty. This article requires submitting evidence of professors updating their teaching practice. Being updated in their discipline allows professors to constantly improve their classroom performance and maintain contact with other people through common interests while keeping them relevant and up-to-date in the fields in which they teach or conduct research.

This article focuses on the nature of the disciplinary training reported by the professor. Evidence must be submitted formally: letters or certificates must be signed by the entity that provided the training, be dated within the period to be evaluated and in the case of external training certificates or certificates from digital platforms such as Coursera, the evidence must include the total number of hours to be considered. Occasionally, certificates may not specify the official length of the course in hours. In these cases, arguments may be given, supported, for example, by the course syllabus or a MOOC screenshot describing the course and specifying its length in hours. Emails are not deemed to be formal evidence and should not be the only evidence submitted.

Evidence must be provided for a total of 72 total hours over the three years in question. A table may be added summarizing courses and hours (indicating that these are documented in SSFF, in the classification CV, or if they are external certificates).

It is worth pointing out that evidence of training (teaching, classroom wellbeing, or diversity and inclusion topics) is to be found in another article related to teaching practices.

In all cases, the required evidence must be submitted within the specified time frame.

For section a)

Evidence of internal (e.g. CADis) or external (e.g. alternative credentials granted by other institutions that teach their courses online or face-to-face) courses in the discipline.
Evidence is assessed in terms of its adherence to the discipline and the hours credited for each course.
This article does not contemplate teacher training courses, educational technology resources, pedagogy, etc., since these come under another article. Evidence should only cover courses pertaining to the professor’s particular discipline.

For section b)

Diplomas or official documents attesting to certification or re-certification by an accredited professional body.

For section c)

Letter provided by the company or organization attesting to participation in the learning initiative, immersion project, or exchange experience. The letter must be formal (letterhead, signed, and dated).

For section d)

A diploma certifying attendance at conferences, congresses, conventions, or seminars. If the document fails to specify the time spent at the event, additional evidence must be attached to validate the number of hours reported by the candidate (the event program, etc.).

For all sections

Evidence of departmental or institutional training may be included, provided that it has been formally recorded and evidence is available.
If the evidentiary document (diploma or certificate) does not specify the number of hours credited, additional supporting evidence must be attached (e.g., a screenshot of the Coursera page with a course description including the estimated length of the course, an evidentiary document comprising academic grades and the estimated number of hours dedicated, an event program estimating the length of integrated activities, etc.)
Evidence that does not make it possible to determine the number of hours dedicated to the task will not be considered.
If evidence of this nature is included in the classification CV training section, it should clearly state which courses are being submitted as disciplinary and how long they last.

References

Format_10.1

Evaluation

merci101e

Example

Example 10.1

ARTICLE 10.2

10.2 Participate in knowledge generation or dissemination activities and/or professional activities, in the past three years, presenting evidence of two products -at least one from subsection a)- and demonstrating, in at least one of them, collaboration in institutional or external field-related or educational networks:

(a) Products:

Have authored or co-authored and published a peer-reviewed research article or book or book chapter with an ISBN about the discipline or about educational innovation or a published patent.
Sponsored professional liaison activities (consulting and/or technological or product development projects, executive education) for at least 60 hours.
Professional disciplinary activities with strategic impact at least at the regional level for a minimum of 60 hours.
Creative work -as author or co-author- that has had some kind of recognition or review by a recognized media outlet or institution in the field (film, audiovisual products, exhibitions, etc.).
Have directly participated as an entrepreneur or founding partner in the creation or start-up of a formally constituted organization, pursuant to all legal requirements, seeking to generate a relevant social, economic, or environmental impact.
Clinical health activities with national professional liaison as befits the discipline.

(b) Other products:

Have authored or co-authored and published an informative article or had an article published in a specialized journal.
Present a poster or paper at national or international refereed conferences.
Continuous participation in the media as an opinion leader (radio programs, television, newspapers, round tables, etc.).
At least 25 hours of continuing education instruction.

The National School may validate the existence of required evidence with an equally strict product ensuring compliance with expected Assistant category requirements on the understanding that the National School has provided the Vice Rector of Faculty’s Office with the list of equivalences and published said list on the classification site prior to the publication of the annual call for applications.

Description

At our institution, professors participate actively and formally in their professional, business, academic and social environment through the practice of their discipline or the formation of collaborative networks, thereby enriching their teaching and exposing their students to the application of their knowledge in real contexts. In this way, teachers constantly update their knowledge in their specialties through continuous participation in professional activities.

Evidence required pursuant to this article must be provided by third parties. Letters issued by organizations must include: teacher’s name, brief description of the activity(ies), date the letter was issued, collaboration dates (time) and the number of work hours. Given that the article pertains to the intellectual vitality domain, the evidence must demonstrate the connection with the professional field in which the professor works.

Under this article, candidates may select evidence from a range of options and there are particular criteria specific to each school allowing them to be evaluated as equivalent products (see the schools’ tables of equivalence). Products may be different, or two or more products of the same type may be submitted, provided that the requirements are met independently for each product. Evidential requirements for each option are described in general terms below:

See Descripción de Productos y Otros Productos

The National School may validate the existence of required evidence with an equally strict product ensuring compliance with expected Associate category requirements on the understanding that the National School has provided the Vice Rector of Faculty’s Office with the list of equivalences and published said list on the classification site prior to the publication of the annual call for applications.

See Tabla de equivalencia por escuela aquí

References

Format 10.2

Evaluation

Example

Example 10.2

SERVICE ARTICLES

ARTICLE 11.1

11.1 Have actively and collaboratively participated in any two of the following activities during the previous three years:

a) A collegiate group from the institution’s programs (e.g. undergraduate academic communities, graduate academies, etc.).

b) An institutional committee or project at school, campus, or department level (e.g. academic program accreditation committees, faculty committees).

Description

Professors who make a gift of certain services to the institution help generate value for their students, colleagues, department, campus, school, and the Tec by doing so. A service activity involves donating time or knowledge in the support of others, in this case, the institution. This article deals specifically with activities that support the institution through active participation and collaboration with collegiate groups, committees, projects, or institutional initiatives.

Faculty development plays an essential part in achieving institutional goals. To this end, professors participate in service activities that improve academic quality, promote collegiate work and decisions for the benefit of the faculty, as well as supporting different groups in the institution.

Collaborative work among professors is of great importance to academia. It makes it possible to share experiences with others that enrich the teaching-learning process. Bringing this exchange of experiences to teaching practice through projects with students has a significant impact on the development of their competencies.

For instance, to provide evidence pursuant to this article, entries in the “Institutional Committees” section of the classification CV, letters issued by committee chair or project (headed notepaper, signature, date, description of participation), institutional certificates and the like may be submitted.

References

Format 11.1

Evaluation

Example 11.1

Example11.1

ARTICLE 11.2

11.2 Have participated in any of the following activities over the last three years:

a) Have rendered service to the discipline by actively participating in at least one event or activity; for example, organized a conference, worked as editor or reviewer in a publication, etc.

b) In addition to their teaching duties, have participated in a community project or association with social impact (e.g., in civic, cultural, social, sports, or political associations, social service or community support projects, participation in citizen committees/councils, leadership positions in professional associations, etc.).

Description

Community service involves activities where individuals donate their time or expertise to support others. This article refers specifically to support activities for groups outside the institution; in other words, service to aid the discipline or community support service.

Professors who make a gift of certain services generate value for the discipline they represent, their school, colleagues, and Tecnológico de Monterrey. Furthermore, through these activities professors create and strengthen links with stakeholders who also have an interest in their discipline. This contributes to the institution’s prestige and accreditations.

Community service activities emphasize contributing to and supporting different groups, as well as raising people’s awareness of the positive effects of contributing to society; in other words, contributions from the professional field to the generation of proposals to respond, mitigate, or find solutions for the important social problems that face society. Social responsibility is one of the great commitments of our institution, so the active participation of our professors in this manner is expected.

Evidence presented (formal letter or certificate) pursuant to this article must be endorsed by the organization in which the service was rendered. Letters must be signed, dated, and written on headed paper of the issuing organization and provide a description of the participation in question. The evidentiary form must be submitted as a PDF file.

References

Format 11.2

Evaluation

Example

Example 11.2