Abstract

Access to a civil service career as a professor in a public university is subject to an accreditation process controlled by Aneca. Aneca’s Academia web system became available on January 15, 2008, to centralize all the accreditation data. This note examines some aspects related to the evaluation of university teaching, and about the usefulness of documentation.

Abstract

A proposal for a qualitative classification of scientific journals specialized in social sciences and humanities is presented. The main objective of CIRC (in Spanish, Clasificación integrada de revistas científicas) is to become a tool to obtain bibliometrics indicators for different levels of aggregation based on the quality of publications. The ranking is the result of consensus of experts in the field of bibliometrics and research evaluation. The resulting classification consists of four groups of journals (gA, gB, gC, gD) configured according to the visibility of the journals; a fifth group of excellence was created with the most relevant journals (gEx). To create groups and determine quality of the journals, various lists and databases referenced in Cneai and Aneca standards were used. Finally, we illustrate the use of CIRC applying it to the scientific production of the departments of Social Sciences at the University of Granada.

Abstract

The prevalence of the pressure to publish and its effects on the professional career of researchers in Communication sciences in Spain is explored. The data collected through an online survey of 290 scholars from public and private universities shows how the pressure to publish in scientific journals affects almost all respondents. Also, the main causes of this pressure come from the evaluation systems and the researchers themselves. The fundamental motivations for publishing are to increase the professional reputation and leave a mark in the field of expertise, while the most prominent effects of the pressure to publish are stress, emotional fatigue, and frustration over publication failures. Regarding the perceived conflict between teaching and research, the study warns of a scenario in which research excellence may be at the expense of, or be disconnected from, teaching excellence. The prevalence and effects of each of these dimensions is explored according to the age, gender, academic range, researches’ years of professional experience, and the nature (public or private) of the university.

Abstract

The current landscape on indicators is characterized by its great activity with new data sources emerging and new indicators being proposed. However, national evaluation processes in Spain and Latin America are characterized by the use of indicators and criteria defined by a conservative view of science becoming ever more updated and with a narrow vision of the scientific activity. In this text we reflect on this paradox and we put forward ideas on how we could work from the bibliometric community, both academic and professional, to connect these two worlds, new indicators and evaluation processes, that are so related and increasingly distant.

Abstract

This essay provides some reflections on the origin of the current scientific evaluation system in Spain, focusing on an analysis of the system of selection and accreditation of university faculty. This system was put in place to prevent academic inbreeding. The thesis that this is mainly a centralized system is rebutted: although accreditation is indeed centralized, faculty selection is carried out by universities themselves. It is argued that we cannot fully trust universities to establish policies that are immune to localism and nepotism if they are not held fully responsible for their actions. The functional imbalance that exists in Spanish university teaching staff is highlighted. Among the activities currently carried out by university professors (teaching, research, knowledge transfer, and management), research is the most highly valued in evaluation programs. More specifically, publications are key to launch and advance careers in the academic environment. The success of the program of sexenios (six-year assessment periods), which serves not only as an incentive for productivity but also as an instrument to establish scientific reputation and academic hierarchy, has contributed to this situation. Other features of the current evaluation system in Spain are the predominance of individual-level evaluation and the use of bibliometric indicators as the final quality values. The Spanish academic evaluation system chose to give preference to individual-level evaluation. Once again, the origin of this approach can be found in the introduction of teacher and researcher productivity salary supplements in 1989. Spanish academics grew up in a culture of individual-level evaluation where they had to obtain their jobs through competitive examinations and were rewarded with bonuses on the basis of personal achievements. Quantitative criteria appeared as the necessary antidotes to curb nepotism. In a country lacking infrastructure and a culture of evaluation, quantitative indicators ensured objectivity and efficiency in the processes of selection and evaluation of publications, and, indirectly, a minimum amount of rigor and relevance of the research itself. The thoughts exposed here are accompanied by suggestions that might help guide the necessary reform of the scientific evaluation system.