Державне Управління Наукометрією: Від Сталості До Відсталості?

Abstract

Introduction:In recent years, they used to take persistent steps in Ukraine towards implementation of quantitative and semi-quantitative methods of analysis of scientific activity in practice of management of state scientific complex. As a rule, they explain a course for publication in journals integrated into the international databases Scopus and Web of Science by the need to improve the quality of publications by Ukrainian scholars and the task of Ukraine's entry into the world academic community. Methods:In this study our key method is document and statistical data analysis.Results: Interest in the role of research metrics indicators when assessing academic achievements of a scientist and the need for publications indexed in research metrics databases Scopus and Web of Science is frequently shown by Ukrainian researchers. The position by the Ministry of Education and Science on «as much as possible» implementation of research metrics indicators turns into another imitation of science reform, and does not contribute to a breakthrough in the world academic community, where the main way to assess scientific results is an expert evaluation, not research metrics indicators. Practices of «predatory publishing», «academic slavery» and «academic fraud» show us that indicators declared as «objective» are now losing their validity. A separate problem is the use of scientometric indicators in the humanities, which is due to the specifics of presenting the results of scientific activities in the humanities. Conclusion:Current management approaches by the Ministry of Education and Science on enforcement of research metrics is a serious threat to Ukrainian science. The use of research metrics indicators when assess quality of scientific activity is only a supplementary component to qualitative indicators. But if quantitative indicators replace qualitative ones, the real picture of scientific knowledge is affected. That is why the world academic community is inclined to believe that the relevant research metrics data should be considered as additional source only.