Prometheus Assessed?

<p>List of figures and tables</p> <p>List of abbreviations</p> <p>Acknowledgements</p> <p>About the authors</p> <p>Chapter 1: Prometheus assessed?</p> <p>Abstract:</p> <p>Bibliometric measures</p> <p>Panel review models</p> <p>Decentralised models</p> <p>But models overlap</p> <p>The philosophy of science and research assessment</p> <p>What use, if any, is the philosophy of science to research assessment?</p> <p>Prometheus assessed – towards a study of the processes and assessment of research</p> <p>Chapter 2: Publication, citation and bibliometric assessment of research</p> <p>Abstract:</p> <p>Publication and its centrality to research assessment</p> <p>Judging research by publication outlet</p> <p>Measuring publication</p> <p>Ranking journals – impact factor and professional association listings</p> <p>Citation analysis</p> <p>Limitations to citations</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Chapter 3: Peer review, refereeing and their discontents: a failed model or simply the least worst option?</p> <p>Abstract:</p> <p>The development of the refereeing process</p> <p>The process of review</p> <p>Valuing peer review</p> <p>Questions and problems regarding peer review and refereeing</p> <p>Conclusion: is refereeing a failed model? Or just the least worst option?</p> <p>Chapter 4: From the Research Assessment Exercise to the Research Excellence Framework: changing assessment models in the United Kingdom?</p> <p>Abstract:</p> <p>Research and science in the United Kingdom</p> <p>The United Kingdom university system</p> <p>The Research Assessment Exercise</p> <p>Evolution of the RAE</p> <p>Process and cost of the RAE</p> <p>Evaluating the RAE</p> <p>The Research Excellence Framework</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Chapter 5: Perils of peer review in a small country? The Performance Based Research Fund in New Zealand</p> <p>Abstract:</p> <p>Higher education policy framework</p> <p>The Performance Based Research Fund – design and operation</p> <p>Quality assessment process</p> <p>PBRF panel process</p> <p>An evaluation of the PBRF by surveying panel members</p> <p>Assessing research outputs</p> <p>Assessing peer esteem</p> <p>Contribution to research environment</p> <p>Respondents’ views of what makes an ‘A’ researcher</p> <p>The process of assessment</p> <p>Respondents’ view of the PBRF scheme</p> <p>Assessing the assessors</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Evaluating the PBRF</p> <p>Conclusion: limitations of the PBRF and suggested improvements</p> <p>Chapter 6: Research evaluation in Japan: the case of the National University Corporations</p> <p>Abstract:</p> <p>Research in Japan</p> <p>The Japanese university system</p> <p>Research assessment and national universities</p> <p>Evaluating the performance of the national universities</p> <p>Implementation and results</p> <p>Analysis and hypotheses</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Chapter 7: Conclusion: Prometheus assessed and lessons for research assessment</p> <p>Abstract:</p> <p>Research and university evaluation in the United States</p> <p>Assessing research – investigating the issues</p> <p>Peer and panel review</p> <p>Problems of group decision-making</p> <p>Disciplinary power, panel review and citation analysis</p> <p>Bureaucratic control and research assessment</p> <p>The dichotomy between bibliometric and panel assessment is a false one</p> <p>Impact, relevance and new directions in research assessment</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>References</p> <p>Index</p>