Bringing arts and humanities perspectives to the redefinition of ”what counts” in research(er) evaluation | DARIAH Open

flavoursofopenscience's bookmarks 2022-01-26

Summary:

by Erzsébet Tóth-Czifra

Research assessment (i.e. decisions on allocation of research funds, academic career advancement, and the hiring of staff) has been recognized as the Achilles heel of firmly grounding Open Science practices in research realities for a long while now. In academia scholars are still facing conflicting injunctions and have to walk on both paved and unpaved paths while advocacy and research policy efforts repeatedly point out enormous complexities, systemic impediments and failed attempts in upscaling thoughtful, alternative proxies that could replace the the current harmful system dominated by publisher prestige. 

As an example of the many voices urging and supporting this change, in DARIAH’s response to the the stakeholder consultation on the  Future of scholarly publishing and scholarly communication  European Commission report in 2019, we argue that the vicious circle  in which research evaluation is lingering can only be broken through a set of urgent and harmonized actions and call for a new social contract between  on the European level involving funders, research performing institutions and their ministries, university networks, disciplinary communities and research infrastructure providers (including publishers).

Link:

https://dariahopen.hypotheses.org/1172

From feeds:

Open Access Tracking Project (OATP) » flavoursofopenscience's bookmarks

Tags:

oa.new oa.dariah oa.open_science oa.humanities oa.metrics oa.evaluation oa.ssh

Date tagged:

01/26/2022, 10:24

Date published:

01/26/2022, 05:24