Alena Nesterenko

Abstracts

1 Management of the Experts in the Research Evaluation System of the University: Based on National Research University Higher School of Economics Example

Authors: Svetlana Petrikova, Alena Nesterenko

Abstract:

Research evaluation is one of the most important elements of self-regulation and development of researchers as it is impartial and independent process of assessment. The method of expert evaluations as a scientific instrument solving complicated non-formalized problems is firstly a scientifically sound way to conduct the assessment which maximum effectiveness of work at every step and secondly the usage of quantitative methods for evaluation, assessment of expert opinion and collective processing of the results. These two features distinguish the method of expert evaluations from long-known expertise widespread in many areas of knowledge. Different typical problems require different types of expert evaluations methods. Several issues which arise with these methods are experts’ selection, management of assessment procedure, proceeding of the results and remuneration for the experts. To address these issues an on-line system was created with the primary purpose of development of a versatile application for many workgroups with matching approaches to scientific work management. Online documentation assessment and statistics system allows: - To realize within one platform independent activities of different workgroups (e.g. expert officers, managers). - To establish different workspaces for corresponding workgroups where custom users database can be created according to particular needs. - To form for each workgroup required output documents. - To configure information gathering for each workgroup (forms of assessment, tests, inventories). - To create and operate personal databases of remote users. - To set up automatic notification through e-mail. The next stage is development of quantitative and qualitative criteria to form a database of experts. The inventory was made so that the experts may not only submit their personal data, place of work and scientific degree but also keywords according to their expertise, academic interests, ORCID, Researcher ID, SPIN-code RSCI, Scopus AuthorID, knowledge of languages, primary scientific publications. For each project, competition assessments are processed in accordance to ordering party demands in forms of apprised inventories, commentaries (50-250 characters) and overall review (1500 characters) in which expert states the absence of conflict of interest. Evaluation is conducted as follows: as applications are added to database expert officer selects experts, generally, two persons per application. Experts are selected according to the keywords; this method proved to be good unlike the OECD classifier. The last stage: the choice of the experts is approved by the supervisor, the e-mails are sent to the experts with invitation to assess the project. An expert supervisor is controlling experts writing reports for all formalities to be in place (time-frame, propriety, correspondence). If the difference in assessment exceeds four points, the third evaluation is appointed. As the expert finishes work on his expert opinion, system shows contract marked ‘new’, managers commence with the contract and the expert gets e-mail that the contract is formed and ready to be signed. All formalities are concluded and the expert gets remuneration for his work. The specificity of interaction of the examination officer with other experts will be presented in the report.

Keywords: Research Evaluation, expertise, management of research evaluation, method of expert evaluations

Procedia PDF Downloads 81