早期职业研究人员在学术界规划未来的影响力冲突

IF 2.9 4区 管理学 Q1 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE Research Evaluation Pub Date : 2023-11-21 DOI:10.1093/reseval/rvad024
Marta Natalia Wróblewska, Corina Balaban, Gemma Derrick, Paul Benneworth
{"title":"早期职业研究人员在学术界规划未来的影响力冲突","authors":"Marta Natalia Wróblewska, Corina Balaban, Gemma Derrick, Paul Benneworth","doi":"10.1093/reseval/rvad024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It has been argued that due to the growing importance attributed to research impact and forms of its evaluation, an academic ‘culture of impact’ is emerging. It would include certain concepts, values, and skills related to the area of generating and documenting impact. We use thematic and discourse analysis to analyse open answers from 100 questionnaires on research impact submitted by ECRs working in the social sciences and humanities (SSH) in Europe. We explore ECR’s early-career stage positions relative to societal impact and the trade-offs necessary to assure an academic career. The results show how, as the first generation of scholars to be socialized towards value of academic research beyond academia, ECRs are confronted with policy signals that encourage a drive for impact, which are at the same time often in line with respondents’ personal values around impact beyond academia. However, ECRs face a number of competing signals about research value within the evaluation spaces necessary to navigate an academic career. Current evaluative structures often dismiss the achievement of societal impact favouring instead narrower definitions of research excellence. Career structures and organizational realities are often unfavourable to impact-related activity, which has implications for an ECRs’ ability to develop coherent professional positionings.","PeriodicalId":47668,"journal":{"name":"Research Evaluation","volume":"35 26","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The conflict of impact for early career researchers planning for a future in the academy\",\"authors\":\"Marta Natalia Wróblewska, Corina Balaban, Gemma Derrick, Paul Benneworth\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/reseval/rvad024\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"It has been argued that due to the growing importance attributed to research impact and forms of its evaluation, an academic ‘culture of impact’ is emerging. It would include certain concepts, values, and skills related to the area of generating and documenting impact. We use thematic and discourse analysis to analyse open answers from 100 questionnaires on research impact submitted by ECRs working in the social sciences and humanities (SSH) in Europe. We explore ECR’s early-career stage positions relative to societal impact and the trade-offs necessary to assure an academic career. The results show how, as the first generation of scholars to be socialized towards value of academic research beyond academia, ECRs are confronted with policy signals that encourage a drive for impact, which are at the same time often in line with respondents’ personal values around impact beyond academia. However, ECRs face a number of competing signals about research value within the evaluation spaces necessary to navigate an academic career. Current evaluative structures often dismiss the achievement of societal impact favouring instead narrower definitions of research excellence. Career structures and organizational realities are often unfavourable to impact-related activity, which has implications for an ECRs’ ability to develop coherent professional positionings.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47668,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Research Evaluation\",\"volume\":\"35 26\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Research Evaluation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvad024\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research Evaluation","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvad024","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

有人认为,由于对研究影响及其评估形式的重视与日俱增,一种学术 "影响文化 "正在兴起。它包括与产生和记录影响领域相关的某些概念、价值观和技能。我们采用主题分析和话语分析的方法,对欧洲社会科学与人文科学(SSH)领域的 ECR 提交的 100 份有关研究影响力的调查问卷中的公开答案进行了分析。我们探讨了 ECR 在职业生涯早期阶段相对于社会影响力的立场,以及确保学术生涯所需的权衡。研究结果表明,作为第一代对学术研究超越学术界的价值进行社会化的学者,ECR 面临着鼓励推动影响力的政策信号,而这些信号往往与受访者对学术界之外的影响力的个人价值观相一致。然而,在学术生涯所必需的评估空间内,ECR 们面临着许多关于研究价值的竞争信号。当前的评估结构往往不重视社会影响的实现,而更倾向于狭义的卓越研究。职业结构和组织现实往往不利于开展与影响相关的活动,这影响了电子通讯员制定协调一致的职业定位的能力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The conflict of impact for early career researchers planning for a future in the academy
It has been argued that due to the growing importance attributed to research impact and forms of its evaluation, an academic ‘culture of impact’ is emerging. It would include certain concepts, values, and skills related to the area of generating and documenting impact. We use thematic and discourse analysis to analyse open answers from 100 questionnaires on research impact submitted by ECRs working in the social sciences and humanities (SSH) in Europe. We explore ECR’s early-career stage positions relative to societal impact and the trade-offs necessary to assure an academic career. The results show how, as the first generation of scholars to be socialized towards value of academic research beyond academia, ECRs are confronted with policy signals that encourage a drive for impact, which are at the same time often in line with respondents’ personal values around impact beyond academia. However, ECRs face a number of competing signals about research value within the evaluation spaces necessary to navigate an academic career. Current evaluative structures often dismiss the achievement of societal impact favouring instead narrower definitions of research excellence. Career structures and organizational realities are often unfavourable to impact-related activity, which has implications for an ECRs’ ability to develop coherent professional positionings.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Research Evaluation
Research Evaluation INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
18.20%
发文量
42
期刊介绍: Research Evaluation is a peer-reviewed, international journal. It ranges from the individual research project up to inter-country comparisons of research performance. Research projects, researchers, research centres, and the types of research output are all relevant. It includes public and private sectors, natural and social sciences. The term "evaluation" applies to all stages from priorities and proposals, through the monitoring of on-going projects and programmes, to the use of the results of research.
期刊最新文献
Correction to: Methods for measuring social and conceptual dimensions of convergence science Correction to: Stated preference methods and STI policy studies: a foreground approach A tribute to our dearly departed colleague and friend: An introduction to the Special Issue in memory of Prof. Paul Benneworth The legal foundation of responsible research assessment: An overview on European Union and Italy The conflict of impact for early career researchers planning for a future in the academy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1