Papers by Marc Vanholsbeeck
info:eu-repo/semantics/nonPublishe
info:eu-repo/semantics/nonPublishe
info:eu-repo/semantics/nonPublishe
This was a very rich conference. I will not try to resume what has been said by the different spe... more This was a very rich conference. I will not try to resume what has been said by the different speakers during these two days. I would rather like to come back on some of the crosscutting and recurring ideas that resonate with my own experience, including my involvement in the recently finished COST ENRESSH action about research evaluation and impact in the social sciences and the humanities and its Special Interest Group on Early Career Investigators (ECIs).
The European Research Area (ERA) acts as an important provider of policy prescriptions inthe fiel... more The European Research Area (ERA) acts as an important provider of policy prescriptions inthe field of research and innovation, now fully integrating the social sciences and humanities(SSH) (Birnbau et al. 2017) and inspiring policy making at national and institutionallevels with regard to a diversity of thematic priorities (Commission 2012). European prescriptionsare of a political as well as a managerial nature, setting objectives to be achievedand prescribing managing tools to monitor the progresses made towards the completionof these objectives. Since the EU has until now never used the legislative power on whichit could rely, European prescriptions are mostly articulated through soft laws -, policy documentsand statements as well as, more indirectly, through the management tools of theERA and the rules that govern the research and innovation funding programs.On the basis of a qualitative analysis of these political and managerial prescriptions and afirst-hand quasi-participant o...
Contextualisation (1) Publications scientifiques et évaluation • Multiplication du nombre de cher... more Contextualisation (1) Publications scientifiques et évaluation • Multiplication du nombre de chercheurs, publiant de plus en plus et de plus en plus tôt • New Public Management et « accountability » • Bases de données bibliographiques internationales (WoS, Scopus) • Indicateurs bibliométriques : mesure des citations et Impact Factor (IF) • Majorité des revues avec IF publiées par les 4 Majors Elsevier, Springer, Wiley, Taylor & Francis (EPRIST 2016
info:eu-repo/semantics/nonPublishe
The conversation, Aug 22, 2021
Université libre de Bruxelles, Feb 26, 2016
Researchers face the following dilemma on a daily basis, which the pandemic has brought to the at... more Researchers face the following dilemma on a daily basis, which the pandemic has brought to the attention of the general public: How can the results of publicly funded research on issues of major importance to humanity be made available to society as a whole, when the major publishers are sequestering this work? Pre-publication platforms have seen a spectacular increase in the number of articles submitted during the Covid-19 pandemic. This success confirms that, when urgency prevails, it is these rapid tools that researchers turn to first, both to inform themselves and to inform. Pre-publications also accelerate the establishment of international collaborations that allow for the rapid compilation of a large volume of epidemiological information and the manipulation of a gigantic amount of data accumulated by many scientists.Les chercheurs sont quotidiennement confrontés au dilemme suivant, que la pandémie a porté à l'attention du grand public : Comment mettre à la disposition de...
1. Un premier apport de notre travail consiste à proposer un cadre théorique, analytique et conce... more 1. Un premier apport de notre travail consiste à proposer un cadre théorique, analytique et conceptuel original, permettant d'approcher la notion de qualité des publications en SHS (sciences humaines et sociales) et en sciences de la communication de façon à la fois holistique et dynamique, en tant qu'elle fait l'objet de descriptions et de jugements multiples, émis par une diversité de parties prenantes, au sein et en dehors des milieux académiques. Pour ce faire, il s'agira de considérer la qualité dans ses différentes dimensions constitutives (approche holistique) tout en l'inscrivant dans le cadre d'évolutions tendancielles en matière de publication scientifique (approche dynamique) et en tenant compte de la qualité telle qu'elle est prescrite, souhaitée et mise en oeuvre par les différentes parties prenantes (chercheurs et entités prescriptrices, aux niveaux politique et managérial). En croisant de façon systématique ces trois approches - approche mu...
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishe
Handbook on Research Assessment in the Social Sciences
<p>Literature shows that, facing the neo-liberal definition of academic excellence, early c... more <p>Literature shows that, facing the neo-liberal definition of academic excellence, early career investigators (ECIs) in the social sciences and the humanities (SSH) have developed particular professional identities and behaviours towards the requirements of the academic career. Specificities of the SSH make the compliance to the assessment procedures of the "neo-liberal university" particularly challenging. Furthermore ECIs in the SSH are caught in an unprecedented "triple bind". While pursuing their post-doctoral career in the context of the neo-liberal university, they are still academically trained in the disciplinary and collegial values of the "traditional university". Although most career rewards and evaluation criteria are bound to the neo-liberal university, researchers now in the early stages of their career also constitute the first generation of academics to be exposed to the new requirements of the "open university", through the Open Science policies and the Impact Agenda. In such context of uncertainty and conflicting rationalities, more efficient "early career building information ecosystems" should be put in place within academia. We also recommend to better integrate ECIs in the design and implementation of research evaluation principles and processes.</p>
Word and Text, Feb 1, 2020
The analysis of the ways early career investigators from 32 countries frame the notion of 'resear... more The analysis of the ways early career investigators from 32 countries frame the notion of 'research impact' in the Social Sciences and the Humanities (SSH) reveal some obvious commonalities. There is a convergent tendency to describe impact as an object of great concern that operates mostly through communication, while avoiding any absolute definition of the notion. Respondents associate impact to the concept of accountability and share the perception that impact does not currently belong to the dominant academic culture. Differentiations and even divergences in framing appear though in regard to the cognitive or social nature of impact as well as in the extent to which respondents associate the processes of conducting scientific research with or dissociate them from the creation of social impact. As such, five common argumentative frames of impact and six differentiated or divergent ones are brought to light. While commonalities can be related to shared socio-professional circumstances, the observed differentiations and divergences in framing are linked to the diversity of disciplinary, national and institutional contexts within which scholars are trained and conduct their research. Because of the coexistence of commonalities, differentiations, and divergences in early career investigators' framing of impact, it is argued that research impact in the SSH is best conceptualized as a 'boundary object' (Star and Griesemer, 1989). We conclude that attempts to frame impact within a narrower perspective-whether in scholarly discourse or policy makingwould finally reduce the diversity of contextualized opportunities for SSH scholars to engage in any valuable creation of impact.
The goal of this panel is to develop a strategy on how to advocate for the social sciences and hu... more The goal of this panel is to develop a strategy on how to advocate for the social sciences and humanities disciplines and to target funders and policy makers, both at national and at European level. Conclusions will be based on the professional experience of the panelists. The exchange of both advocacy experiences and as examples of actual best practices, challenges, or obstacles will help us in finding a common ground to operate on the European level while taking into account local specificities. This panel will include brief presentations on how to advocate for the social sciences and humanities disciplines in European countries by working with funders, policy makers, researchers and other stakeholders. The session will be based on actual examples of such activities. Presentations will be followed by a moderated Questions and Answers. Chairs/Moderators: Sally Chambers, Elisabeth Ernst, Mateusz Franczak Speakers: Alíz Horváth, Nina Kancewicz-Hoffman, Jane Ohlmeyer, Jack Spaapen, Ma...
0info:eu-repo/semantics/publishe
Uploads
Papers by Marc Vanholsbeeck