Applying R&R in (interim) Research Evaluation?

Comments

• • Elizabeth Koier
  • 1716899270

  In the UMCG we were the first to use the new SEP with a Dean that wanted to apply R&R.

  What we did:

  • Two focus groups with stakeholders led by an external and the report of these meetings in the Self Evaluation
  • New career paths in self reflection
  • Narratives for both research impact ánd societal impact
  • PhD in the central committee
  • Argument what we are proud of and what could be improved including numbers
  • Every institute chose their own (societal and research) impact indicators and added a paragraph on why these were chosen in relation to their strategy
  • In an appendix a relatively old fashioned list of numbers of publications, Field Weighted Citation Index and personnel numbers. But NO H- Index or other derived metrics

  
• • Bianca Langhout
  • 1716964391

  Hi Jeroen,

  We are also experimenting with this, mainly from an impact perspective. Please feel free to reach out Stefan de Jong and @maudvanroessel. They are working on SEP and try to develop a tool that helps to have a more qualitative/process oriented perspective instead of a quantitative perspective. But it is definitely a challenges to convince people, especially in certain disciplines!

  It might also relate to some extend to the way Erasmus MC is working on their portfolio model that is used as a evaluation instrument (note: not sure what the exact status is right now). In there they use much more qualitative indicators/narratives compared to the past and also include strategic personnel planning and talent development (which is to some extent definitely in line with R&R). You could reach out to @lottevanderheijden and @adriancohen to learn more about this.

  Best,

  Bianca

  
• • Sean Sapcariu (FNR Luxembourg - Research Culture and assessment)
  • 1717482962

  Hi Jeroen,

  If you want a perspective from outside of NL, in Luxembourg we have changed our reporting templates and guidelines to be more reflective/qualitative, in line with the broader recognition and rewarding of research activities found in a narrative CV.

  Our guidelines are available here if you want to take a look: https://fnrlu.sharepoint.com/:f:/s/Website/Epr8jAJld0FIs_e5liKVi1gBWZRYTvFWi0Wqqgh1480URA?e=RiGwhA

  I've also attached them to make it easier.

  If you have questions, feel free to reach out!
  
  Sean

  

  Sean Sapcariu added a new document

  Reporting_Guidelines_for_FNR_Funded_Projects_2024_May_07.pdf (PDF, 842 KB)

  • 1717482948

  
• • Anna van 't Veer
  • 1717613447

  Hi all, I believe CWTS has a nice (and open) example of this, here: https://sep.cwts.nl/report/1.-introduction

  
• • Bianca Langhout
  • 1718200705

  @maudvanroessel see suggestion of Anna! Are you aware of this one already?

  
• • Jeroen Jansen (University of Twente (R&R@UT))
  • 1718272142

  In de faculteit waar ik aan verbonden ben zijn we ook bezig met de SEP mid-term. Daarin is onze ervaring en stand van zaken met EW ,op faculteitsniveau, opgenomen. Jeroen en ik zien elkaar volgende week. Hartelijke groet, Jeroen

  
• • Kim Huijpen
  • 1719233848

  @jeroenvanderham I hope that these suggestions helped you!

  The Strategy Evaluation Protocol and Room for everyone's talent have been written at the same time. With at least one co-author involved in both projects (me ;-0 ). The same idea and mindset is behind the two developments. One with a focus on the research group (SEP) and one with the focus on the individual and the multifacetted team. I really hope that writing your self evaluation helps you implementing R&R and/or the other way around.

  And, most important. The idea of the SEP 2021-2027 is that you don't start with the numbers. But with the strategy of the group. But the authors above me also more or less already mentioned that.