Kontraindikacije kriterijuma vrednovanja akademskog rada u društvenim i humanističkim naukama u Republici Srbiji u 21. veku: Preliminarni rezultati kvalitativnog antropološkog istraživanja
COUNTERINDICATIVE SOCIAL SCIENCE AND HUMANITIES ACADEMIC EVALUATION CRITERIA IN SERBIA IN 21. CENTURY: PRELIMINARY FINDINGS OF A QUALITATIVE ANTHROPOLOGICAL RESEARCH

Author(s): Miloš Milenković
Subject(s): Politics / Political Sciences, Social Sciences, Sociology, Methodology and research technology
Published by: Институт друштвених наука
Keywords: Serbia; humanities and social sciences; academic evaluation; research policy; anthropology of science
Summary/Abstract: The qualitative ethnographic bottom-up research whose preliminary results are delivered in this lecture, was focused on the prolonged dispute over SSH academic evaluation criteria in Serbia. Its specific goal was to obtain a sound understanding of the impact of the current SSH research evaluation system in order to provide evidence-based recommendations for its revision. The preliminary findings of analysis of what consequences academic evaluation produces from the point of view of SSH scholars corroborated the main hypothesis – if SSH scholars are expected to engage with the knowledge-to-policy agenda they were nominally called upon, they need to re-establish their authority not only in society at large, but within the research and higher education sectors as well. Interviewed colleagues, research participants from five academic and cultural centres in Serbia, almost unanimously assert the country’s academic evaluation policy is characterised by 1) highly biased research evaluation criteria defined by policymakers serving solely interests of STEM fields, and 2) misbalanced research funding that continually devalues SSH. SSH were both structurally and systematically subordinated and have been referred to as ,,weak, “ ,,irrelevant“ and ,,underdeveloped“, because field-unspecific evaluation criteria, which left SSH specificities out of the Research and Development policy framework, were applied. SSH scholars’ general sentiment is that evaluation criteria are not only incompetently adapted to SSH research assessment, but purposively biased or even malicious. SSH as a field still lacks proper evaluation protocol capable of reflecting its cultural functions and societal potential which requires urgent policy reform.

• Details
• Contents