Click here to download

A New Scenario for the Evaluation of University Research
Journal Title: SOCIOLOGIA E RICERCA SOCIALE  
Author/s: Alberto Silvani 
Year:  2013 Issue: 100 Language: Italian 
Pages:  9 Pg. 170-178 FullText PDF:  595 KB
DOI:  10.3280/SR2013-100016
(DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation:  clicca qui   and here 


The growing attention on research evaluation in universities has underlined the importance of having a data system of information able to both sustain the decision-making process, and allow its use for different and not always converging purposes. Promoting excellence does not always coincide with the need to guarantee high quality and availability in an increasingly competitive environment. The «system dimension» is not considered for what it actually signifies, both at an internal and external level of the university. The article underlines the «internal evaluation», the procedures and choices that are maturing in the Italian context, starting with the recognition of the phenomenon promoted by Crui, and taking into consideration three very different examples. These examples differ in organizational aspects, and are considered based on their development and their motivational drive. The conclusions underline how the scenario is constantly evolving and needs to take note of the changing forms and ways of communication. This includes a process that leads to the realization of the scientific results to disseminate. The hope is to avoid the risk of confining evaluation activity in a contradictory and partial environment, and open it to the progression of knowledge.

  1. Crui (2013), Valutazione interna della ricerca, a cura di Natalia Paganelli ed Elena Breno, https://www.crui.it/HomePage.aspx?ref=2148.
  2. European Commission, Innovation Union Scoreboard 2013, http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/innovation/facts-figures-analysis/innovation-scoreboard/.
  3. P. Grandjean, L. Eriksen Mette, O. Ellegaard, J.A. Wallin (2011), «The Matthew Effect in Environmental Science Publication: A Bibliometric Analysis of Chemical Substances in Journal Articles», Environmental Health, 10, 96, http://www.ehjournal.net/content/10/1/96.
  4. Karolinska Intitutet (2008), Bibliometric Handbook for Karolinska Institutet, http://ki.se/content/1/c6/01/79/31/bibliometric_handbook_karolinska_institutet_v_1.05.pdf.
  5. P. Miccoli, A. Fabris (a c. di) (2012), Valutare la ricerca? Capire applicare, difendersi, Pisa, Ets.
  6. Miur, HIT2020, https://www.researchitaly.it/uploads/50/HIT2020.pdf.
  7. D.N. Arnold, K.K. Fowler (2011), «Nefarious Numbers», Notices of the Ams, 58, pp. 434-7, http://www.ams.org/notices/201103/rtx110300434p.pdf.
  8. A. Baccini (2010), Valutare la ricerca scientifica: uso e abuso degli indicatori bibliometrici, Bologna, il Mulino.
  9. A. Baldissera (2009), La valutazione della ricerca nelle scienze sociali, Roma, Bonanno.
  10. V. Pinto (2012), Valutare e punire, Napoli, Cronopio.
  11. P. Rossi (2012), «Problemi e prospettive per la valutazione della ricerca in Italia», Rassegna italiana di valutazione, 52.
  12. G. Ruocco (2013), La valutazione interna della ricerca. Il caso della «Sapienza», presentazione tenutasi alla Crui il 6 marzo 2013.

Alberto Silvani, A New Scenario for the Evaluation of University Research in "SOCIOLOGIA E RICERCA SOCIALE " 100/2013, pp. 170-178, DOI:10.3280/SR2013-100016

   

FrancoAngeli is a member of Publishers International Linking Association a not for profit orgasnization wich runs the CrossRef service, enabing links to and from online scholarly content