首页> 外文期刊>Research policy >How peer review empowers the academic profession and university managers: Changes in relationships between the state, universities and the professoriate
【24h】

How peer review empowers the academic profession and university managers: Changes in relationships between the state, universities and the professoriate

机译:同行评审如何赋予学术界和大学管理者权力:国家,大学与教授之间的关系变化

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Universities are expected to be important players in the development of knowledge economies; therefore, they are a priority on the policy agenda of the European commission and of member states. To understand the new institutional settings where knowledge production is achieved, we must turn our attention to analyzing the reforms underway. Building on conclusions from the sociology of professions, the sociology of organizations and public policy analysis, this paper argues that the policy instruments developed by public authorities to measure scientific performance and selectively allocate resources rely on peer review processes and reinforce an academic elite. As a result, the internal power distribution within the academic profession as well as within universities has changed. On the one hand, peer review is used as a managerial tool by universities. The decisions made at the university level are largely based on (and legitimated by) evaluations conducted outside the university by an elite sitting in research councils, editorial boards, and evaluation agencies. On the other hand, rather than weakening professional power, the recent reforms have instead led to a reconfiguration of the academic profession. Their influence is twofold. First, they have empowered those individuals who set the norms according to which academic activities are rewarded and funded by public actors. Second, they bolster those who receive positive reviews, since they gain a stronger position to negotiate with the managers of their university.
机译:预计大学将成为知识经济发展的重要参与者;因此,它们是欧洲委员会和成员国政策议程上的优先事项。要了解实现知识生产的新制度环境,我们必须将注意力转向分析正在进行的改革。基于专业社会学,组织社会学和公共政策分析得出的结论,本文认为,公共机构制定的用以衡量科学绩效和有选择地分配资源的政策工具依赖于同行评审程序并强化了学术精英。结果,学术专业内部以及大学内部的内部权力分配发生了变化。一方面,同行评议被大学用作管理工具。在大学一级做出的决定主要是基于由研究委员会,编辑委员会和评估机构中的精英在大学以外进行的评估(并由这些评估合法化)。另一方面,最近的改革并未削弱专业能力,反而导致了学术专业的重新配置。他们的影响是双重的。首先,他们授权那些制定规范的个人,根据这些规范,学术活动将受到公共行为者的奖励和资助。其次,他们支持那些受到好评的人,因为他们获得了更强的地位与大学管理者进行谈判。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号