Evolution of National Research Evaluation Exercise in Italy
Chen Kun1,2,Li Xiaoxuan1,Yang Guoliang1
1.Institute of Policy and Management,Chinese Academy of Sciences,Beijing 100190,China; 2.University of Chinese Academy of Sciences,Beijing 100190,China
Abstract：To echo the public desire of improving research performance and demonstrating the impact of research on the economy and society,national research evaluation exercises are undergoing big changes in many countries.Taking Italy VQR as an example,this paper analyzes an evolutionary trend of national research evaluation exercises in evaluation objects,methods and indicators.Furthermore,it also discusses the differences and disputes appeared during the changes
[1]Abramo G,DAngelo CA.Evaluating Research:from Informed Peer Review to Bibliometrics[J].Scientometrics,2011,87(3):499-514. [2]Rebora G,Turri M.The UK and Italian Research Assessment Exercises Face to Face[J].Research Policy,2013,42(9):1657-1666. [3]教育部高等教育评估中心.评估中心代表团访问欧洲三国质量保障机构[EB/OL].http://www.pgzx.edu.cn/modules/jiaoliuyuhezuo_d.jsp?id=10525. [4]ANVUR.Bando DI partecipazione[EB/OL].[2011-11-7].http://www.anvur.org/attachments/article/122/bando _vqr_def_07_11.pdf. [5]Martin BR,Whitley R.The UK Research Assessment Exercise:a Case of Regulatory Capture? In:Reconfiguring Knowledge Production:Changing Authority Relationships in the Sciences and Their Consequences for Intellectual Innovation.[M].Oxford:Oxford University Press;2010. [6]Henkel M.The Modernisation of Research Evaluation:the Case of the UK[J].High Educ,1999,38(1):105-122. [7]Hicks D.Evolving Regimes of Multi-university Research Evaluation[J].High Educ,2009,57(4):393-404. [8]Chubin DE,Hackett EJ.Peerless Science:Peer Review and U.S.Science Policy[M].Albany:SUNY Press,1990. [9]Abramo G,DAngelo C,Di Costa F.National Research Assessment Exercises:a Comparison of Peer Review and Bibliometrics Rankings[J].Scientometrics,2011,89(3):929-941. [10]龚旭.同行评议公正性的影响因素分析[J].科学学研究,2004,22(6):613-618. [11]刘莉.英国大学科研评价改革:从RAE到REF[J].科学学与科学技术管理,2014,35(2):39-45. [12]张哲.评价体系应切实反映学术机构优劣——访德国科学委员会研究部主管瑞纳·兰格[EB/OL].http://www.csstoday.net/Item/50535.aspx. [13]Bertocchi G,Jappelli T,Peracchi F.Bibliometric Evaluation vs.Informed Peer Review:Evidence from Italy[R].Napoli:University of Naples,2013. [14]Franceschet M,Costantini A.The First Italian Research Assessment Exercise:a Bibliometric Perspective[J].J Informetr,2011,5(2):275-291. [15]Abramo G,DAngelo CA,Di Costa F.National Research Assessment Exercises:a Comparison of Peer Review and Bibliometrics Rankings[J].Scientometrics,2011,89(3):929-941. [16]Norris M,Oppenheim C.Citation Counts and the Research Assessment Exercise V-Archaeology and the 2001 RAE[J].J Doc,2003,59(6):709-730. [17]Oppenheim C.The Correlation Between Citation Counts and the 1992 Research Assessment Exercise Ratings for British Research in Genetics,Anatomy and Archaeology[J].J Doc,1997,53(5):477-487. [18]Oppenheim C,Summers MAC.Citation Counts and the Research Assessment Exercise,Part VI:Unit of Assessment 67(music)[J].Inf Res,2008,13(2):342-342. [19]Van Raan AFJ.Comparison of the Hirsch-index with Standard Bibliometric Indicators and with Peer Judgment for 147 Chemistry Research Groups[J].Scientometrics,2006,67(3):491-502. [20]Aksnes DW,Taxt RE.Peer Reviews and Bibliometric Indicators:a Comparative Study at a Norwegian University[J].Res Evaluat,2004,13(1):33-41. [21]Rinia EJ,van Leeuwen TN,van Vuren HG,van Raan AFJ.Comparative Analysis of a Set of Bibliometric Indicators and Central Peer Review Criteria-Evaluation of Condensed Matter Physics in the Netherlands[J].Research Policy,1998,27(1):95-107.
2015, 
