1 / 13

Quality representations in the SSH in an evaluative context

Quality representations in the SSH in an evaluative context. Workshop MSHB Rennes 2 nd and 3 rd of June 2014. Why a closed workshop?. Not a public event Reproducing the ESF format for informed discussion Not a debate about the need for evaluation

vila
Télécharger la présentation

Quality representations in the SSH in an evaluative context

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Quality representations in the SSHin an evaluative context Workshop MSHB Rennes 2nd and 3rd of June 2014

  2. Why a closed workshop? • Not a public event • Reproducing the ESF format for informed discussion • Not a debate about the need for evaluation • SHS is a given, but how and why is not. • A discussion about what we are doing and why • From government, agency and above all SSH researcher outlooks • Creating a network and forum for active researchers in the field

  3. Quality? What is quality? • Oxford Dictionary of English • The standard of something as measured against other things of a similar kind: the degree of excellence of something • In other words, no benchmarks > no quality, and no evaluation • Fixing the benchmarks with the stakeholders • SSH researchers ARE stakeholders • “from a university perspective, evaluation should reflect research reality and the needs and aspirations of those involved“ (LERU, 2012)

  4. Constraints • Who is evaluating what and why • The local, regional and national contexts • The disciplinary context • Levels of evaluation • Individual • Research Unit • Department, School or Faculty • Institution • The word ‘evaluation’ • Interpretation, misinterpretation and unnecessary conflict

  5. Why are we here? At the beginning…

  6. Evolutions 1° EvalHUM: an ongoing initiative www.evalhum.eu 2° A COST proposal… still in process! 3° An ESF workshop proposal 4° QualiSHS: an « interMSH project »

  7. QualiSHS: the sponsor Réseau des Maison des sciences de l’homme (1962: Fondation MSH, Fernand Braudel) Cooperation platforms dedicated to SSH research Initial objectives: • To overcome individualism in SSH research (stimulate interdisciplinarity and cooperation between institutions) • To improve access to tools and sources

  8. QualiSHS: partners • Université de Bretagne Sud • Institut d’études politiques de Grenoble • ENS Lyon • U. Paris-Est Créteil • Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung, Allemagne • Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientificas, Espagne • Eidgenössischte Technische Hochschule Zürich, Suisse • University of Sussex, Royaume Uni

  9. QualiSHS: objectives 1° Delineate perceptions and concepts of quality of the SSH researchers. 2° Identify differences among disciplines, at the national and international level. 3° Understand the changes in the conceptualisation of quality, from a historical perspective. 4° Explore the relation between concepts of quality and evaluative methods and protocols.

  10. QualiSHS: methodology Sources • Interviews with SSH researchers • Informal evaluation literature (book reviews) • Large scale survey about the conceptualisation of quality • Institutional reports Focus on 4 domains (Law, History, Literature studies, Economy) and research units from 2 regions: Bretagne and PACA

  11. QualiSHS: methodology Methods and techniques from 4 disciplines: - sociology • history • corpus linguistics • literary studies.

  12. QualiSHS: expected outcomes Better understanding of the epistemology of the SSH Identifying the major discrepancies between evaluation protocols and practices in the SSH research Draft recommendations for improving the evaluation methods: tools, databases, protocols and training of evaluators

  13. Qualityrepresentations in the SSHin an evaluativecontext • Opening: • Professor Didier Houssin, Director AERES/HCERES • Evaluation protocols and agencies, and their concepts of quality • Qualitative and quantitative criteria and methods • Publishing practices in the SSH in an evaluative context • Representations of quality: a wide national, disciplinary and sociological variety

More Related