1 / 24

Outline

Excellence for society International evaluation of research and doctoral TRAINING at the University of Helsinki 2005-2010. Outline. Role of Steering group Risk taking endeavour Evaluation aspects Success of RCs in evaluation Rewards. Steering group (2010-2012) and its role.

jeremy-mcclain
Download Presentation

Outline

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Excellence for societyInternational evaluation of research and doctoral TRAINING at the University of Helsinki2005-2010 Vice-Rector Johanna Björkroth 7 May 2012

  2. Outline • Role of Steering group • Risk taking endeavour • Evaluation aspects • Success of RCs in evaluation • Rewards Osasto / Henkilön nimi / Esityksen nimi

  3. Steering group (2010-2012) and its role Vice-Rector Johanna Björkroth(pj) Professor MarjaAiraksinen(vpj) Chief information specialist Maria Forsman Professor ArtoMustajoki Univ. lecturer KirsiPyhältö Director, Academic Affairs OssiTuomi Doctoral candidate JussiVauhkonen

  4. Some critical questions discussed Participation categories Researcher Community – in evaluation – in future Voluntary participation Performance profiles related to success and rewarding Usefulness of data and reports Bibliometrics Societal impact

  5. Evaluation aspects in Panels’ feedback Scientific quality Scientific significance Societal impact Processes of leadership and management Collaboration Innovativeness Future significance

  6. Material given to the Panels E-forms List of publications (TUHAT) List of other scientific activities (TUHAT) CWTS/Leiden bibliometric analyses RCs Entire University HULibbibliometric analyses for the RCs Doctoral Survey Background information Statistics about the UH and the Finnish HE

  7. Participating Researcher Communities(page161)

  8. Quality and focus of research Mean of scores (1-5) 3.96 • Natural Sciences 4.16 • Biological, Agr. and Vet. Scs 4.02 • Humanities 4.02 • Medicine, Biomed and Health Scs 4.00 • Social Scs 3.72 • (Page 168)

  9. Doctoral training Mean of scores (1-5) 4.02 • Humanities 4.30 • Medicine, biomed and Health Scs 4.09 • Natural Scs 4.02 • Biological, Agr. and Vet. Scs 3.88 • Social Scs 3.86 • (Page 168)

  10. Societal impact Mean of scores (1-5) 4.03 • Humanities 4.18 • Medicine, biomed and Health. Scs 4.17 • Biological, Agr. and Vet Scs 4.02 • Social Scs 3.94 • Natural Scs 3.82 • (Page 168)

  11. Collaboration Mean of scores (1-5) 4.08 • Medicine, biomed and Health Scs 4.22 • Natural Scs 4.09 • Social Scs 4.08 • Humanities 4.07 • Biological, Agr. and Vet. Scs 3.93 (Page 168)

  12. Distributions of numeric evaluation – Panel: Biological, Agricultural and Veterinary Sciences (page 67)

  13. Distributions of numeric evaluation – Panel: Medicine, Biomedicine and Health Sciences (page84)

  14. Distributions of numeric evaluation – Panel: Natural Sciences (page 105)

  15. Distributions of numeric evaluation – Panel: Humanities (page125)

  16. Distributions of numeric evaluation – Panel: Social Sciences (page146)

  17. Monetary rewards for the years 2013 - 2016 Total 10.47 million euro – division based on the performance of research and doctoral training • Rewards will be addressed according to the numerical scores of RCs in participation categories • The highest 30 percent in each category will be rewarded • Score level of success is unique in each category • Amount of reward will be determined according to the number of PIs in successful RCs • The success criteria is determined by the first four evaluation questions

  18. Category 1: Cutting edge (page 345)

  19. Category 2: Close to Cutting Edge (page 346)

  20. Category 3: Exceptional(page 346)

  21. Category 4: Innovative opening (page 347)

  22. Category 5: Societal impact (page 347)

  23. Conclusion • MORE – Helsinki • Hasbeennotedbyotheruniversities • Produced a valuable set of data • Initiateddiscussionaboutcollaboration • Producedfirsttimebibliometricraports

  24. Thankyou Allreportsareavailable in electronicform: http://www.helsinki.fi/julkaisut/halvin_julkaisut.shtml University-levelpaperbackreportcanbeordered: https://elomake.helsinki.fi/lomakkeet/35495/lomake.html

More Related