Quantifying ‘Output’ for Evaluation: Administrative Knowledge Politics and Changing Epistemic Cultures in Dutch Law Faculties

Kaltenbrunner, Wolfgang; Rijcke, Sarah de

doi:10.1093/scipol/scw064

Cited by 15 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In academia, we draw on a primarily interview-based research project in law faculties in the Netherlands, investigating how epistemic dynamics of scholarship are mediated through emerging evaluation schemes, in particular through the 'micropolitics' of indicator use [40]. In healthcare, we build on an ongoing research project in which we study how quantified evaluation practices (i.e.…”

Section: Research Settings and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The micropolitics of indicator-use [40] further play out in mobilizing (new) care routines. Indicators actively produce care practices as they set the norm for 'good care'.…”

Section: Mobilizing Care Improvementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Digital platforms like ResearchGate allow scholars to constitute and 'better' their scholarly reputation [20], for example by putting a project on ResearchGate and downloading and liking papers of co-authorswho are then enticed to 'like' the other in return. Others have pointed out researchers' and particularly group leaders' abilities to renegotiate values attached to evaluative metrics, for instance through negotiating how a specific journal is valued in a certain academic field and how publication achievements count in career mobility decisionsshowing how evaluative metrics themselves become renegotiated, worked around and used by professionals [19,40] and are embedded in wider practices of valuation.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Advancing to the Next Level: Caring for Evaluative Metrics Monsters in Academia and Healthcare

Kaltenbrunner¹,

Hammarfelt

Rijcke³

et al. 2018

IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper we use the notions of play and (finite and infinite) games to analyze performance management practices in professional work. Whilst evaluative metrics are often described as 'monsters' impacting on professional work, we illustrate how metrics can also become part of practices of caring for such work. Analyzing the use of evaluative metrics in law faculties and in hospitals, we show how finite gamesgames played to winand infinite gamesgames played for the purpose of continuing to playare intertwined and how this intertwinement affects academic and healthcare work.

show abstract

Section: Research Settings and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The micropolitics of indicator-use [40] further play out in mobilizing (new) care routines. Indicators actively produce care practices as they set the norm for 'good care'.…”

Section: Mobilizing Care Improvementmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Advancing to the Next Level: Caring for Evaluative Metrics Monsters in Academia and Healthcare

Kaltenbrunner¹,

Hammarfelt

Rijcke³

et al. 2018

IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A major challenge is the variety and complexity of publication information (e.g., OA status of publications) and the diversity of data providers and sources (e.g., researchers, data-collection personnel, external databases). Diversity of practices between fields and publication types can increase ambiguity over definitions, such as peer-review status of publications (Kaltenbrunner & de Rijcke, 2016;. In national databases supporting PRFS, standardization and interoperability of data are promoted by means of national level data-collection guidelines with definitions and requirements for reported publications (Sivertsen, 2019).…”

Section: Challenges With Using Cris-based Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Open access at the national level: A comprehensive analysis of publications by Finnish researchers

Pölönen

null

Guns

et al. 2020

Quantitative Science Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Open access (OA) has mostly been studied by relying on publication data from selective international databases, notably Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus. The aim of our study is to show that it is possible to achieve a national estimate of the number and share of OA based on institutional publication data providing a comprehensive coverage of the peer-reviewed outputs across fields, publication types and languages. Our data consists of 48,177 journal, conference and book publications from 14 Finnish universities in 2016-2017, including information about OA status, as self-reported by researchers and validated by data-collection personnel through their Current Research Information System (CRIS). We investigate the WoS, Scopus and DOI coverage, as well as the share of OA outputs between different fields, publication types, languages, OA mechanisms (gold, hybrid and green), and OA information sources (DOAJ, Bielefeld list and Sherpa/Romeo). We also estimate the role of the largest international commercial publishers compared to the not-for-profit Finnish national publishers of journals and books. We conclude that institutional data, integrated at national and international level, provides one of the building-blocks of a large-scale data infrastructure needed for comprehensive assessment and monitoring of OA across countries, for example at the European level.

show abstract

“…The resulting organizational dynamics affect junior researchers, but they also pose new challenges to senior researchers in positions with organizational responsibility (Kaltenbrunner and de Rijcke 2016). Sparkes (2007) describes the dilemmas and bodily discomfort experienced by academic mid-level management struggling to both care for those they are responsible for and comply with the imperatives of indicator-drive institutional competition and the evaluative infrastructures that come with it.…”

Section: Indicators Competition and Organizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

<b>Implicated in the Indicator Game? An Experimental Debate</b>

Fochler

Rijcke

2017

Engaging STS

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The rise of new modes evaluating academic work has substantially changed institutions and cultures of knowledge production. This has been reflected and criticized in the literature in STS and beyond. For STS scholars, these debates (should) however have an even more specific dimension. Many of us are experts on aspects of these changes. But at the same time, we too are part of the processes we are analyzing, and often criticizing. To put it slightly provocatively, often we cannot avoid playing the very same game that we scrutinize. This creates tensions that many of us reflect on, and it certainly has created many implicit and explicit normative stances on how to deal with them. Yet it seems that so far there has been little room in our field to reflect on and exchange this particular kind of experience-based knowledge. There are many different ways to engage with the dynamics of evaluation, measurement and competition in contemporary academia, or to play what we refer to colloquially here as the "indicator game." With this debate, we would like to give room to the expression and discussion of some of these ways. This text is the introduction and prompt to an experimental debate. We discuss the state of the academic discussion on the impact of indicator-based evaluation on academic organization, epistemic work and identities. We use insights from these debates to raise questions for how STS and STSers themselves deal with the indicator game. In conclusion, we summarize our contributors' arguments and propose the concept of "evaluative inquiry" as a new way of representing the quality of STS work in evaluative contexts.

show abstract

Quantifying ‘Output’ for Evaluation: Administrative Knowledge Politics and Changing Epistemic Cultures in Dutch Law Faculties

Cited by 15 publications

References 25 publications

Advancing to the Next Level: Caring for Evaluative Metrics Monsters in Academia and Healthcare

Advancing to the Next Level: Caring for Evaluative Metrics Monsters in Academia and Healthcare

Open access at the national level: A comprehensive analysis of publications by Finnish researchers

<b>Implicated in the Indicator Game? An Experimental Debate</b>

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About