Evidence in Czech research evaluation policy: measured and contested

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00237752%3A_____%2F15%3A%230000221" target="_blank" >RIV/00237752:_____/15:#0000221 - isvavai.cz</a>

Výsledek na webu

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1332/174426415X14467432784664" target="_blank" >http://dx.doi.org/10.1332/174426415X14467432784664</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1332/174426415X14467432784664" target="_blank" >10.1332/174426415X14467432784664</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

Evidence in Czech research evaluation policy: measured and contested

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

The Czech research evaluation policy was rooted in an instrumental paradigm of policy process and evidence embodied in metrics-based cost-benefit logic. But this framework disintegrated when confronted with actual institutional interests. Based on the ethnography of university departments, this study shows how academics challenged the notion of evidence for evaluation. It is argued that research policy should be studied as an arena of conflicting group and individual interests, where policy process is regarded as a contested meaning-making process rather than a rational-technical one. It is demonstrated that the role of evidence in research evaluation policies is situational according to the knowledge regimes of the academic communities involved.

Název v anglickém jazyce

Evidence in Czech research evaluation policy: measured and contested

Popis výsledku anglicky

The Czech research evaluation policy was rooted in an instrumental paradigm of policy process and evidence embodied in metrics-based cost-benefit logic. But this framework disintegrated when confronted with actual institutional interests. Based on the ethnography of university departments, this study shows how academics challenged the notion of evidence for evaluation. It is argued that research policy should be studied as an arena of conflicting group and individual interests, where policy process is regarded as a contested meaning-making process rather than a rational-technical one. It is demonstrated that the role of evidence in research evaluation policies is situational according to the knowledge regimes of the academic communities involved.

Druh

J_x - Nezařazeno - Článek v odborném periodiku (Jimp, Jsc a Jost)

CEP obor

AM - Pedagogika a školství

OECD FORD obor

—

Projekt

<a href="/cs/project/GAP404%2F11%2F0127" target="_blank" >GAP404/11/0127: Masové vysoké školství v institucionálním kontextu: etnografie vysokoškolských kateder v České republice</a><br>

Návaznosti

P - Projekt vyzkumu a vyvoje financovany z verejnych zdroju (s odkazem do CEP)

Rok uplatnění

2015

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

Evidence and Policy

ISSN

1744-2656

e-ISSN

—

Svazek periodika

—

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

November

Stát vydavatele periodika

GB - Spojené království Velké Británie a Severního Irska

Počet stran výsledku

16

Strana od-do

1-15

Kód UT WoS článku

000369338200001

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

—