ON THE COUNTER-EUROPEAN CONSEQUENCES OF SSH EVALUATION IN SERBIA: THE RESULTS OF A QUALITATIVE FIELDWORK STUDY
Ključne reči:
research evaluation, consequential analysis, qualitative research, Serbia, European integration, anthropology of science, anthropology of educationApstrakt
The findings of a bottom-up qualitative fieldwork analysis of the social and political consequences the Serbian research assessment system produces, from the point of view of social science and humanities (SSH) scholars, are contextualised in the ongoing debate on the allegedly “European” character of that system. In the context of the recent developments in SSH research assessment put forward by some of the leading European academic institutions and organisations, data analysis points to the
counter-indicative character of research and higher education reforms implemented in countries like Serbia.
Reference
Baćević, Jana. 2006. Od trga do tržnice: antropologija, kritike savremenog obrazovanja, i njihov značaj za Srbiju (From Public Place to Market-Place: Anthropology, Critiques of Contemporary Education, and its Meaning in Serbia). Etnoantropološki problemi 1(2): 209–230.
Basso, Antonella et al. 2016. The role of books in non-bibliometric areas. ANVUR Working paper 2017/02. Roma: Agenzia Nazionale per la Valutazione del sistema Universitario e della Ricerca. http://www.anvur.org/attachments/article/1195/WPS%20201702-ROBINBA.pdf.
Ejdus, Filip. 2018. Mapping and Analysis of the Social Science Research System in Serbia. https://www.academia.edu/37657575/Mapping_and_Analysis_of_the_Social_Science_Research_System_in_Serbia.
Espeland, Wendy Nelson and Michael Sauder. 2007. Rankings and Reactivity: How Public Measures Recreate Social Worlds. American Journal of Sociology 113(1): 1–40.
Gačanović, Ivana. 2009. Antropološke perspektive o/u kulturi revizije (Anthropological perspectives on/in culture of auditing). Antropologija 8: 81–97.
Gačanović, Ivana. 2010. Problem globalnog rangiranja univerziteta ili o iskušenjima savremenih visokoobrazovnih sistema (The Question of World University Rankings, Or: On the Challenges Facing Contemporary Higher Education Systems). Etnoantropološki problemi 5(2): 185–204.
Gačanović, Ivana. 2019. Univerzitet i kultura revizije: antropološka analiza (University and Audit culture: anthropological analysis). Etnoantropološki problemi – monografije, knj. 14. Beograd: Odeljenje za etnologiju i antropologiju Filozofskog fakulteta Univerziteta u Beogradu i Dosije studio.
Gavrilović, Ljiljana. 2009. Domaća antropologija na stranim jezicima ili: Dobrovoljna (auto)kolonizacija (Serbian anthropology in foreign languages or: voluntary (self) colonization). Antropologija 8: 53–68.
Giminez-Toledo, Elea et al. 2015. “The Evaluation of Scholarly Books as Research Output. Current Developments in Europe”. In: A. A. Salah, Y. Tonta, A. A. Akdag Salah, C. Sugimoto, & U. Al (eds.). Proceedings of the 15th International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics Conference, Istanbul, Turkey, 29th June to 4th July, pp. 469–476. Istanbul: Bogazici University.
Good practice in the evaluation of researchers and research programmes. Statement by three national academies (Académie des Sciences, Leopoldina and Royal Society) Hicks, Diana. 2004. “Four Literatures of Social Sciences”. In: Moed, Henk. F et al. (eds.) Handbook of Quantitative Science and Technology Research, pp. 473–496. New York: Kluwer Academic Publishers. https://www.leopoldina.org/uploads/tx_leopublication/2017_Statement_3Acad_Evaluation.pdf
Israel, Mark and Ian Hay 2012. Research Ethics for Social Scientists. London: Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Kovačević, Ivan and Miloš Milenković. 2013. Članak važniji od knjige!? (Article valued more than a book!?). Etnoantropološki problemi 8(4): 899–925.
Kovačević, Ivan. 2013. Lažne dileme srpskih društveno-humanističkih naučnika (False dilemmas of Serbian social sciences and humanities). Antropologija 13(3): 163–175.
Löhkivi, Endla, Katrin Velbaum and Jaana Eigi. 2012. Epistemic Injustice in Researh Evaluation: A Cultural Analysis of the Humanities and Physics in Estonia. Studia Philosophica Estonica 5(2): 108–132
Milenković, Marko and Miloš Milenković. 2013. Serbia and the European Union: Is the “culturalization” of accession criteria on the way? In: Laursen, Finn (ed.) EU enlargement: current challenges and strategic choices (Multiple Europes vol. 50), pp. 153–172. Brussels: P.I.E. Peter Lang.
Milenković, Miloš and Ivan Kovačević. 2014 “No authority without competence. Administrative de-centralization as a foundation of the future of the University of Belgrade”, 241–260. In: Mirković and Milenković, eds. 2014
Milenković, Miloš. 2009. O brojanju i merenju (drugih) ljudi (za novac) (On counting and measuring (other) people (for money)). Anthropologija 8: 33–52.
Milenković, Miloš. 2009. O brojanju i merenju (drugih) ljudi (za novac) (On counting and measuring (other) people (for money)). Anthropologija 8: 33–52.
Milenković, Miloš. 2010. Ka politici srpske antropologije za XXI vek. Beograd: Filozofski fakultet i SGC.
Ochsner, Michael, Sven Hug and Ioanna Galleron. 2017. The Future of Research Assesment in the Humanities: Bottom Up Assesment Procedures. Palgrave Communications 3(17020): 1–12
Pajić, Dejan and Tanja Jevremov. 2014. Globally national – Locally international: Bibliometric analysis of a SEE psychology journal. Psihologija 47(2): 263–277.
Pajić, Dejan. 2015. Globalization of the social sciences in Eastern Europe: Genuine breakthrough or a slippery slope of the research evaluation practice? Scientometrics 102(3): 2131–2150.
Pavićević, Aleksandra. 2009. Revizionistička ideološka matrica: Spoljnji ili unutrašnji neprijatelj antropološkog promišljanja stvarnosti (Audit ideological matrix: Outside or inside enemy of anthropological comprehension of reality?). Antropologija 8: 69–79.
Pfeffer, Jeffrey and Gerald L. Salancik. 2003. The External Control of Organisations: A Resource Dependence Perspective. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Power, Michael. 1999. The Audit Society: Rituals of Verification. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Shore, Chris and Stephen Roberts. 1995. Higher Education and the Panopticon Paradigm: Quality Assurance as Disciplinary Technology. Higher Education Review 27(3): 8–17.
Shore, Chris and Susan Wright. 1999. Audit Culture and Anthropology: Neo-Liberalism in British Higher Education. The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 5(4): 557–575.
Shore, Chris and Susan Wright. 2015. Governing by numbers: audit culture, rankings and the new world order. Social Anthropology 23(1): 22–28.
Shore, Chris. 2008. Audit culture and illiberal governance: Universities and the politics of accountability. Anthropological Theory 8(3): 278–98.
Strathern, Marilyn. 1996. From Improvement to Enhancement: an Anthropological Comment on the Audit Culture. Cambridge Anthropology 19(3): 1–21.
Thompson, Jennifer Wolfe. 2002. The Death of the Scholarly Monograph in the Humanities? Libri 52: 121–136.
Urošević, Branko and Dušan Pavlović. 2013. Istraživanja u društvenim naukama u Srbiji posle 1990. godine (Social science research in Serbia after 1990.). Političke perspektive 3(2): 103–128.
Williams, Peter et al. 2009. The role and future of the monograph in arts and the humanities research. Aslib Proceedings 61(1): 67–82.
Žikić, Bojan. 2009. „Druga strana revizorske kulture: Studija primera odnosa obaveza i opterećenja univerzitetskih nastavnika“ (The other side of audit culture: Case study of obligations and duties of university professors). Antropologija 8: 99–120.
