{"id":634,"date":"2026-08-27T22:22:09","date_gmt":"2026-08-27T22:22:09","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/aca.edu.ge\/?page_id=634"},"modified":"2026-08-27T22:22:09","modified_gmt":"2026-08-27T22:22:09","slug":"aca-guide-visibility-academic-personal-website-risks","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/aca.edu.ge\/?page_id=634","title":{"rendered":"Academic Personal Website \u2014 Common risks, mistakes and red flags"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n

ACA ACADEMIC DECISION GUIDE \u00b7 ACADEMIC VISIBILITY<\/strong><\/p>\n

Academic Personal Website \u2014 Common risks, mistakes and red flags<\/h1>\n

A credible academic plan begins with evidence: current qualifications, documented research, teaching, service, institutional criteria and a realistic target. ACA can help organise and strengthen that plan, while the final authority for appointment, promotion, equivalence or regulated titles remains with the competent institution or jurisdiction.<\/p>\n<\/header>\n

\n

Avoid title inflation<\/h2>\n

Do not use a professorial or institutional title merely because a network, course or support programme uses academic language. Use titles only according to valid appointment or legal authority.<\/p>\n

Avoid quantity-only strategies<\/h2>\n

Publishing rapidly without regard to relevance, integrity or institutional criteria can create cost without improving eligibility.<\/p>\n

Avoid destination assumptions<\/h2>\n

Rules can differ sharply between countries and universities. Verify the receiving institution\u2019s requirements before relying on a credential, membership or support document.<\/p>\n

Evidence standard<\/h2>\n

Quality is not merely quantity. Ten strong, relevant and well-documented contributions can be more useful than a larger list that does not satisfy the target institution\u2019s rules. Candidates should therefore map evidence to criteria instead of assuming that one universal threshold exists.<\/p>\n

A practical preparation method<\/h2>\n

First define the destination: a specific university, country, promotion system, research objective or professional goal. Second, obtain the current written criteria. Third, compare those criteria with the evidence already available. Fourth, identify gaps. Fifth, build a realistic schedule for research, writing, teaching evidence, networking or documentation.<\/p>\n

Institutional and legal boundary<\/h2>\n

External recognition is always destination-specific. A document can be genuine and still require separate equivalence, legalisation, translation, licensing or institutional assessment. The receiving authority\u2019s current rules should therefore be checked before major financial or career decisions.<\/p>\n

Questions to verify independently<\/h2>\n