Evaluation of Scientific Outputs with a Focus at Mass Communication – A Case Study from Slovakia

Author:

Školkay AndrejORCID

Abstract

The analytical-polemical extended book review loosely follows the earlier polemic initiated in the Czech journal Filosofický časopis and complements the descriptive contribution published in the Slovak journal Otázky žurnalistiky. In this way the issue of evaluating scientific outputs is being transferred in the form of a pars pro toto analysis to the field of journalism and mass media research, or mass communication. The main issues of the original discussion, which is relevant globally, particularly in Central and Eastern Europe, were: who is responsible for (in many cases) the problematic current state of sciences, in particular, social sciences, and how should we evaluate (and categorise) the outputs of scientists. This contribution argues that the root of the problem is not neo-liberalism (or, for that matter, its twin – capitalism), but the often dysfunctional and, in many cases, largely formal system of (self-)evaluation of scientific outputs. Therefore, the solution lies in carrying out any chosen method of evaluating scientific outputs in a meaningful way. This also means application of a combination of assessment of academic outputs (i.e. use at least two of many appropriate assessment approaches simultaneously). Using the example of output from the field of mass media or mass communication, it is shown that only quantitative reporting of academic outputs (‘metrics’) is not sufficient. Moreover, only in the qualitative evaluation there is present the criterion of the usefulness of scientific outputs for society that should be taken into account. At the same time, in this way the statistical method of reporting scientific activity retrospectively is verified. In the end, this combined approach will also answer whether it makes sense for the society to finance any research or publication activity down to the level of a particular researcher. In this context, the contribution points to the problematic scientific and pedagogical value, and generally low social value, of a specific output in the field of the philosophy of communication, claimed to be a ‘scientific monograph’ originally intended as a theoretical guide for scientific research in the given area.

Publisher

University of Warsaw

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3