Our Ref: PS.
915 12th November, 2025
Engr Prof Kenneth K. Dagde
River State University
Nigeria
Email: [Link]@[Link]
Dear Sir,
PROMOTION OF ACADEMIC STAFF
EXTERNAL ASSESSMENT ON
CANDIDATE’S PROMOTION OF KNOWLEDGE
This University is currently considering Dr Solomon Asante-Okyere for promotion from
Lecturer to Senior Lecturer in the Department of Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering.
Our criteria for promotion require that an external assessment of each candidate’s
promotion of knowledge as evidenced by his/her publications be sought, and you have
been proposed as an external assessor for this candidate.
For your information, two other criteria (teaching and service) will be used by the
University in addition to your assessment to arrive at a final decision on the application.
We should, therefore, be grateful if you would kindly assist in this exercise by assessing
the quality of the under listed publications which Dr Solomon Asante-Okyere has
submitted in support of his application and which are enclosed. The following are the
selected papers out of his publications for your assessment:
1. Asante-Okyere S. and Osei H. (2024), “Real-Time Yield Point Prediction for
Water-Based Drilling Mud using Particle Swarm Optimised Neural Network”,
Ghana Mining Journal, Vol. 24, No. 1, pp.169-177.
2. Asante-Okyere, S., Marfo, S. A. and Ziggah, Y. Y. (2023), “Estimating Total
Organic Carbon (TOC) of Shale Rocks from their Mineral Composition using
Stacking Generalization Approach of Machine Learning”, Upstream Oil and Gas
Technology, Vol. 11, No.1, pp. 100089-100096.
3. Owusu, E. B., Tetteh, G. M., Asante-Okyere, S. and Tsegab, H. (2023),
“Geochemistry and Depositional Environment of Black Shale Beds of the Belata
Formation, Peninsular Malaysia”, Petroleum Science and Technology, Vol. 42, No.
24 pp.1-24.
4. Asante-Okyere, S. and Osei, H. (2022), “Generation of Synthetic Density Log
Response using Multivariate Adaptive Regression Splines”, Ghana Mining Journal,
Vol. 22, No. 2, pp. 50-57.
5. Li, Y. and Asante-Okyere, S. (2022), “Reconstruction of Quantitative Lithofacies
Palaeogeography based on Latent Class Analysis from Observed Samples”,
Modeling Earth Systems and Environment, Vol. 8, No. 3, pp. 3117-3125.
6. Marfo, S. A., Asante-Okyere, S. and Ziggah, Y. Y. (2022), “A New Flowing
Bottom Hole Pressure Prediction Model using M5 Prime Decision Tree Approach”,
Modeling Earth Systems and Environment, Vol. 8, No. 2, pp. 2065-2073.
7. Asante-Okyere, S., Shen, C. and Osei, H. (2022), “Enhanced Machine Learning
Tree Classifiers for Lithology Identification using Bayesian Optimization”, Applied
Computing and Geosciences, Vol. 16, No. 1, pp. 100100-100107.
8. Owusu, E. B., Tetteh, G. M., Asante-Okyere, S. and Tsegab, H. (2022), “Error
Correction of Vitrinite Reflectance in Matured Black Shales: A Machine Learning
Approach”, Unconventional Resources, Vol. 2, No.1, pp. 41-50.
9. Asante-Okyere, S., Ziggah, Y. Y. and Marfo, S. A. (2021), “Improved Total
Organic Carbon Convolutional Neural Network Model based on Mineralogy and
Geophysical Well Log Data”, Unconventional Resources, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 1-8.
10. Mulashani, A. K., Shen, C., Asante-Okyere, S., Kerttu, P. N. and Abelly, E. N.
(2021), “Group Method of Data Handling (GMDH) Neural Network for Estimating
Total Organic Carbon (TOC) and Hydrocarbon Potential Distribution (S1, S2) using
Well Logs”, Natural Resources Research, Vol. 30, No. 5, pp. 3605-3622.
The thrust of your assessment should be on quality rather than on quantity and should
indicate whether the publications demonstrate the following three criteria:
1. Creativity/Originality
2. Contribution to knowledge
3. Scholarship/Presentation
It is important that you write down the assessment of each paper in a few sentences and
provide a short summary of the overall assessment of all the papers.
Use Table 3 (attached) to present the scores of your assessment. Do please use the
information provided in Table 1 and Table 2 (also attached) to complete Table 3. An
example of a completed Table 3 is also attached for your attention.
We enclose a copy of the candidate’s Curriculum Vitae (CV) to give you an idea of his
profile which will assist you in assessing him as an academic. Please note that the
evidences mentioned in the CV are not enclosed because they are too bulky.
In order to meet our assessment schedules and deadline, we should be pleased if you
could submit your assessment by email directly to the following e-mail address:
vc@[Link] within a month.
You would be paid US$300.00 as honorarium for your service. We should be happy to
have the following particulars of your bank so that we can pay you the honorarium:
Account Name:
Bank Name:
Branch:
Account Number:
Swift Code:
Yours faithfully,
Prof Richard K. Amankwah
Vice Chancellor
GUIDELINES FOR ASSESSMENT OF SENIOR MEMBERS (TEACHING)
EVALUATION OF PERFORMANCE IN THE PROMOTION OF KNOWLEDGE
Table 1: Maximum Marks Awardable for each Criterion
Creativity or Scholarship & Contribution to
Type of Paper Total Mark
Originality Presentation Knowledge
Journal 5 5 4 14
Conference 4 3 3 10
Book 3 3 2 8
Chapter in Book 2 2 1 5
Patent/Exhibition 2 2 1 5
Table 2: Authorship Factors
Any of 2 Co- 1st of 3 or more 2nd & others of 3 or
Type of Paper Single Author
authors Co-authors more Co-authors
Journal 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.50
Conference 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.50
Book 1.00 0.50 0.50 0.50
Chapter in Book 1.00 0.25 0.25 0.25
Patent/Exhibition 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.25
Table 3: Assessment Sheet
Creativity or Scholarship & Contribution Total Mark Authorship
Paper Type of Paper Score
Originality Presentation to Knowledge (T) Factor (F)
No. (See Table 1) (T x F)
(See Table 1) (See Table 1) (See Table 1) (See Table 1) (See Table 2)
1
10
11
Total Score (Maximum Total Score obtainable = 140)
Rate (See below)
Rate: A candidate’s promotion of knowledge is rated as follows:
• Inadequate if Total Score < 50
• Adequate if 50 Total Score < 70
• Good if 70 Total Score < 90
• High if 90 Total Score 140
…………………………………..…………………. ………………………….. ……...…………
Name of Assessor Signature of Assessor Date
GUIDELINES FOR ASSESSMENT OF SENIOR MEMBERS (TEACHING)
EVALUATION OF PERFORMANCE IN THE PROMOTION OF KNOWLEDGE
Table 1: Maximum Marks Awardable for each Criterion
Creativity or Scholarship & Contribution to
Type of Paper Total Mark
Originality Presentation Knowledge
Journal 5 5 4 14
Conference 4 3 3 10
Book 3 3 2 8
Chapter in Book 2 2 1 5
Patent/Exhibition 2 2 1 5
Table 2: Authorship Factors
Any of 2 Co- 1st of 3 or more 2nd & others of 3 or
Type of Paper Single Author
authors Co-authors more Co-authors
Journal 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.50
Conference 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.50
Book 1.00 0.50 0.50 0.50
Chapter in Book 1.00 0.25 0.25 0.25
Patent/Exhibition 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.25
Table 3: Assessment Sheet (Example of completed table)
Creativity or Scholarship & Contribution Total Mark Authorship
Paper Type of Paper Score
Originality Presentation to Knowledge (T) Factor (F)
No. (See Table 1) (T x F)
(See Table 1) (See Table 1) (See Table 1) (See Table 1) (See Table 2)
1 Journal 4 4 3 11 1 11
2 Journal 4 4 3.5 11.5 1 11.5
3 Journal 3.5 3.5 3 10 1 10
4 Journal 4 3 3 10 1 10
5 Journal 4 3.5 3.5 11 0.5 5.5
6 Journal 4 3 3 10 1 10
7 Conference 3 2 2 7 1 7
8 Book 2 2 1 5 0.5 2.5
9 Chap in Book 1.5 1 0.5 3 1 3
10 Patent 1.5 1.5 0.5 3.5 1 3.5
Total Score (Maximum Total Score obtainable = 140) 74.0
Rate (See below) Good
Rate: A candidate’s promotion of knowledge is rated as follows:
• Inadequate if Total Score < 50
• Adequate if 50 Total Score < 70
• Good if 70 Total Score < 90
• High if 90 Total Score 140
