Criteria for Assessing Quality in Academic Research: The Views of Biomedical Scientists, Clinical Scientists and Social Scientists

Autor/inn/en	Albert, Mathieu; Laberge, Suzanne; McGuire, Wendy
Titel	Criteria for Assessing Quality in Academic Research: The Views of Biomedical Scientists, Clinical Scientists and Social Scientists
Quelle	In: Higher Education: The International Journal of Higher Education and Educational Planning, 64 (2012) 5, S.661-676 (16 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	0018-1560
DOI	10.1007/s10734-012-9519-2
Schlagwörter	Evaluation Criteria; Scientific Research; Quality Control; Peer Evaluation; College Faculty; Biomedicine; Scientists; Social Scientists; Attitudes; Foreign Countries; Canada + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Qualitätskontrolle; Fakultät; Biomedizin; Scientist; Wissenschaftler; Social scientist; Sozialwissenschaftler; Attitude; Einstellung; Verhalten; Ausland; Kanada
Abstract	This study empirically addresses the claim made by Gibbons et al ("The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies." Sage, Thousand Oaks, 1994) that a novel form of quality control (associated with Mode 2 knowledge production) is supplementing the "traditional" peer-review process (associated with Mode 1 knowledge production). A qualitative design was used to explore faculty members' views on the criteria for assessing scientific research. Ninety-four semi-structured interviews were conducted with biomedical scientists, clinical scientists, and social scientists working in Canadian universities. Results show that the vast majority of participants are aligned with the "traditional" Mode 1 peer-reviewed procedures for assessing research and defining scientific excellence. These participants asserted that peer review is the best quality control mechanism for assessing scientific research, and peer recognition the key attribute for legitimacy in the academic arena. In contrast, participants ascribed a low value to non-academics' judgment of their work. While the study findings do not provide support Gibbons et al.'s claim, they add to a growing body of evidence that supports the continuing importance of peer review in academic career success. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	Springer. 233 Spring Street, New York, NY 10013. Tel: 800-777-4643; Tel: 212-460-1500; Fax: 212-348-4505; e-mail: service-ny@springer.com; Web site: http://www.springerlink.com
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2017/4/10