03.11.2014 Views

ReseaRch Quality assuRance foR the futuRe a ... - Lund University

ReseaRch Quality assuRance foR the futuRe a ... - Lund University

ReseaRch Quality assuRance foR the futuRe a ... - Lund University

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

annex 4 – terms of reference<br />

reports via <strong>the</strong> portal, and Panel experts access reports, statistics and<br />

o<strong>the</strong>r material through <strong>the</strong> portal.<br />

4. Evaluation Criteria<br />

The chief criteria for evaluation are:<br />

• <strong>Quality</strong> (international comparability and innovative power)<br />

• Productivity (scientific production)<br />

• Relevance (scientific, social and socioeconomic significance)<br />

• Vitality and ability to manage research (flexibility, control and leadership)<br />

Evaluators are expected to grade research units on a six-point scale<br />

(described below) according to <strong>the</strong>se criteria. This is done primarily at<br />

department (or comparable unit) level but may also be done at lower or<br />

higher organisational levels. Individuals are, however, not to be evaluated.<br />

If <strong>the</strong> evaluation Panel is unable to agree on a grade, <strong>the</strong>y should<br />

give reasons for this. Evaluation according to <strong>the</strong> criteria given must be<br />

made with due consideration of <strong>the</strong> mission of <strong>the</strong> department or unit in<br />

question.<br />

The criteria should be interpreted as follows:<br />

<strong>Quality</strong> is to be understood as a measure of excellence and attention<br />

received. It is founded on <strong>the</strong> reputation and position of <strong>the</strong> unit within<br />

<strong>the</strong> community of researchers. The quality is assessed on <strong>the</strong> basis of <strong>the</strong><br />

ability of <strong>the</strong> unit to achieve and present clear-cut scientific analyses and<br />

results. The assessment reflects <strong>the</strong> position of <strong>the</strong> unit in relation to <strong>the</strong><br />

frontier of research. That position is best judged through peer review. In<br />

<strong>the</strong> analysis, <strong>the</strong> peers fall back on <strong>the</strong>ir own knowledge and expertise.<br />

Productivity relates to <strong>the</strong> total volume of scientific reports of <strong>the</strong> unit.<br />

These are usually in <strong>the</strong> form of written publications, but o<strong>the</strong>r forms<br />

of publication are acceptable. The quantification of production may be<br />

refined by means of bibliometry, which allows citation frequency to be estimated,<br />

or by o<strong>the</strong>r means of describing <strong>the</strong> significance of a publication<br />

to <strong>the</strong> community. Productivity and its impact must be judged in relation<br />

to <strong>the</strong> number of researchers at <strong>the</strong> department or unit.<br />

518

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!