Prometheus Assessed?

Shaun Goldfinch is an Associate Professor at the Nottingham University Business School, University of Nottingham. Kiyoshi Yamamoto is a Professor at the University of Tokyo and the Center for National University Finance and Management, Tokyo.

"This excellent book fills a glaring gap in literature and is packed full of research into researcher and university performance assessment. It takes a no-holds-barred approach to investigating and teasing apart the different methods for research assessment, showing the perils and pitfalls of each and just how shaky the foundations for assessment really are. The case studies of Britain, Japan and New Zealand are particularly illuminating. The book is a must read for those subject to the ever-present regulation of publishing and research activity through peer-review and other methods of triage. It should be on the desk of every university Vice-Chancellor and President, as well as all tertiary education and research policy makers." --Robin Gauld, Professor of Health Policy, University of Otago Medical School, New Zealand

• List of figures and tablesList of abbreviationsAcknowledgementsAbout the authorsChapter 1: Prometheus assessed?Abstract:Bibliometric measuresPanel review modelsDecentralised modelsBut models overlapThe philosophy of science and research assessmentWhat use, if any, is the philosophy of science to research assessment?Prometheus assessed – towards a study of the processes and assessment of researchChapter 2: Publication, citation and bibliometric assessment of researchAbstract:Publication and its centrality to research assessmentJudging research by publication outletMeasuring publicationRanking journals – impact factor and professional association listingsCitation analysisLimitations to citationsConclusionChapter 3: Peer review, refereeing and their discontents: a failed model or simply the least worst option?Abstract:The development of the refereeing processThe process of reviewValuing peer reviewQuestions and problems regarding peer review and refereeingConclusion: is refereeing a failed model? Or just the least worst option?Chapter 4: From the Research Assessment Exercise to the Research Excellence Framework: changing assessment models in the United Kingdom?Abstract:Research and science in the United KingdomThe United Kingdom university systemThe Research Assessment ExerciseEvolution of the RAEProcess and cost of the RAEEvaluating the RAEThe Research Excellence FrameworkConclusionChapter 5: Perils of peer review in a small country? The Performance Based Research Fund in New ZealandAbstract:Higher education policy frameworkThe Performance Based Research Fund – design and operationQuality assessment processPBRF panel processAn evaluation of the PBRF by surveying panel membersAssessing research outputsAssessing peer esteemContribution to research environmentRespondents’ views of what makes an ‘A’ researcherThe process of assessmentRespondents’ view of the PBRF schemeAssessing the assessorsResultsEvaluating the PBRFConclusion: limitations of the PBRF and suggested improvementsChapter 6: Research evaluation in Japan: the case of the National University CorporationsAbstract:Research in JapanThe Japanese university systemResearch assessment and national universitiesEvaluating the performance of the national universitiesImplementation and resultsAnalysis and hypothesesDiscussionConclusionChapter 7: Conclusion: Prometheus assessed and lessons for research assessmentAbstract:Research and university evaluation in the United StatesAssessing research – investigating the issuesPeer and panel reviewProblems of group decision-makingDisciplinary power, panel review and citation analysisBureaucratic control and research assessmentThe dichotomy between bibliometric and panel assessment is a false oneImpact, relevance and new directions in research assessmentConclusionReferencesIndex