Module 3: Research evaluation and profiles of HEIS
Mapping of scientific excellence V2 – A bibliometric information tool for Switzerland?
Rüdiger Mutz, ETH Zurich, Professorship for Social Psychology and Research on
Higher
Abstract:
In view of the problems of peer review for evaluating research (e.g., biases), the question of correctives and additions to peer review is of particular importance. Since the turn of the millennium, the importance of bibliometrics defined as the quantitative analysis of documents as they are listed in bibliographic databases has increased significantly. The Excellence Mapping project developed by Bornmann, Clemente, de Moya-Anegon, Haunschild, Mutz and Stefaner aims to process bibliometric data to enable a comparative interpretation of the performance of universities and research institutions worldwide by visualizing bibliometric indicators on a map. In contrast to the Leiden ranking, a statistical model is used that includes additional factors as covariates that might distort institutional comparisons. The tool is among others able to answer questions of how institutions would perform, if all countries were equally economically productive. The new version, which will be released later this year, not only has a completely new user interface, but also adds altmetrics to the classicial bibliometric data. In addition to the scientific impact, the societal impact of an institution can now be graphically represented. The aim of the paper is to present the new tool and to discuss it critically with regard to its applicability to the Swiss university landscape. One limitation, for example, is that due to certain selection criteria not all universities can be presented.
Vertical cooperation in shared policy fields: do Swiss higher education institutions play the game of profile building?
Lukas Baschung, Haute école de gestion Arc//HES-SO
Abstract:
Since the creation of a federal law on higher education in the late 1960s (Perellon 2001) and even after the profound reform of Swiss federalism (Ladner and Desfontaine Mathys 2019), higher education and research is still a common task of the Confederation and the cantons. As in other shared policy fields, this situation necessitates coordination in order to elaborate and implement policies in an effective and efficient way. The fact that Swiss higher education institutions (HEIs) benefit of a high level of autonomy adds complexity to vertical coordination. One of the central objectives of the Federal act on funding and coordination of the Swiss higher education sector (Swiss Confederation 2011) consists in producing coordination among those three actors, i.e. the Confederation, the cantons and HEIs, among others regarding their profile building and “distribution of tasks”. This means a clear distinction in terms of activities between the three types of HEIs (traditional, applied and teacher universities) and also a certain distinction between the HEIs of a same type. Griessen and Braun (2010) consider that institutional tools have been created in order to permit the achieving of better coordination. However, given the large autonomy of HEIs, the question has to be asked to what extent HEIs respect the idea of coordination regarding profile building. The present proposal examines this question by analysing the development of new educational programmes within a number of Swiss HEIs since the coming into force of the new federal law in 2015.
Under pressure: How Swiss universities improve their internal resource allocation
Kerstin Press, University of Zurich
Abstract:
With looming reductions in public funding, universities are pressured to find ways to keep evolving. While the most immediate consideration has been the diversification of income sources (e.g. more third party funding), many income streams cited from UK or US examples are institutionally closed to local universities (e.g. endowment and investment income). Another option are strategies to improve the allocation of existing budgets. Drawing on qualitative interviews with experts from 5 Swiss Higher Education Institutions, the paper looks at approaches to improve internal resource allocation. Examples covered include changes in the planning of professorships, cost and activity accounting as well as integrated planning procedures.
The impact of effective and foreseen European funding access restrictions: Evidence from Swiss and UK participation in EU framework programs
Marco Cavallaro, Università della Svizzera Italiana
Abstract:
Following the Brexit vote, access by UK organizations to the next EU Framework Program for R&D (EU FP) may be restricted. As of now, the effect of a country’s status change on EU FP participation has not been addressed by scholars. This paper aims to correct this lack, by examining how institutional barriers resulting from policy decisions influence the level of participations in R&D collaborations. We consider Switzerland’s 2014 downgrade to third country status in Horizon 2020. The true effect of the status change is considered in parallel to organizational and reputational factors, which have been previously analyzed in the literature on EU FP participation. The analysis shows that the effect of the status downgrade has been partially alleviated by the universities’ experience in EU FP funding, their reputation and their size. This implies that non-EU HEIs’ existing collaboration networks can mitigate the effect of non-eligibility for EU funding, at least in the short term. The extent to which universities will be affected by institutional barriers will thus depend on how well these are integrated into the European R&D landscape. A preliminary analysis of the effect of Brexit on UK university participations demonstrates however a strong negative impact on the number of projects coordinated and on the number of grants acquired in the MSCAs, the H2020 research mobility grants. The uncertainty related to the access of UK to EU FPs, possible immigration restrictions and foreseen consequences on the economy may have lessen the attractiveness of UK universities as research destination.
National research evaluation systems: Where’s the place of Switzerland in Europe?
Michael Ochsner, FORS, Lausanne
Abstract:
The emergence of the knowledge society and the introduction of so-called New Public Management led to the implementation of systematic research evaluation procedures all over Europe and beyond. However, these evaluation procedures differ widely across countries. In this presentation, I report from a large comparative project on national research evaluation systems undertaken by the COST-Action “European Network for Research Evaluation in the Social Sciences and Humanities (ENRESSH)”. I will address three questions: What is a national research evaluation system and how do they differ between countries? How do evaluation procedures relate to conceptions of research quality? And: Where is the place of Switzerland on the map of European national research evaluation systems? Our research shows that evaluation procedures are very diverse across European countries. While different procedures have advantages and disadvantages, the characteristics of a national research evaluation system follow tradition rather than research policy needs. Often, evaluation methods do not reflect research practices, especially regarding the social sciences and humanities, which comes with the risk of reducing the interaction with society. A link to conceptions of research quality can help design evaluation systems that better adapt to the current situation in a country and to policy needs. I suggest a shift of perspective in the design of evaluation procedures from an administrative point of view to an analysis of what happens at the shop floor: Switzerland can serve as a good example.