Research evaluation is an activity undergoing change. The traditional peer review system with its focus on scientific content and methodology has long been the backbone of research evaluation, but over the last three decades other criteria and considerations have also been integrated into the evaluation of science. This paper investigates how recent societal developments -epitomised by the concept of the Agora -influence research evaluations and how we perceive them. Are they still grounded in a scientific rationale, or are they more to be understood as a result of a social rationale?
Dette working paper er udgivet som del af REMAP-projektet: REsearch MAnagement Processes under rapid changeYderligere oplysninger om REMAP kan findes på projektets web-site: www.remap.dk. Department of Management, Politics and Philosophy AbstractThis paper argues the need for a new approach to the management of academic researchers and their research work. It is held that the requirement for a new management paradigm at the universities is accentuated by all the significant challenges in the knowledge production system (described as mode 2, triple helix, post-academic science etc.). The paper not only argues the need for a new management approach but also attempts to sketch an outline of an approach to microlevel management of academic researchers. This approach seeks to strike a balance between autonomy for the academics and organisational steering.
Dette working paper er udgivet som del af REMAP-projektet: REsearch MAnagement Processes under rapid changeYderligere oplysninger om REMAP kan findes på projektets web-site: www.remap.dk. Department of Management, Politics and Philosophy AbstractThis paper argues the need for a new approach to the management of academic researchers and their research work. It is held that the requirement for a new management paradigm at the universities is accentuated by all the significant challenges in the knowledge production system (described as mode 2, triple helix, post-academic science etc.). The paper not only argues the need for a new management approach but also attempts to sketch an outline of an approach to microlevel management of academic researchers. This approach seeks to strike a balance between autonomy for the academics and organisational steering.
This paper asks whether post-academic science, alternatively referred to as Mode 2 or Triple Helix, can be given disciplinary foundations in spite of its often-displayed organisational diversity, relevance orientation and transdisciplinarity. It answers the question in the affirmative, after having first reviewed and criticised a number of traditional concepts of disciplinarity and disciplinary emergence, established a new basis for conducting a paradigm analysis of fragmented, soft and user oriented fields of inquiry, and finally reviewed a case institute where this type of research has been sustained for over 10 years in a virtual setting (geographically distributed without a 'home base'). The argument of the paper is that the concept of post-academic disciplinarity may be reconstructed as the guiding principles of hybrid research collective's historical and institutional context, where a 'hard core' of reflexive communicative inclusiveness pertains vis-à-vis certain issues, instrumentalities and practitioner constellations.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.