Annamaria Silvana de Rosa

Transcription

1 Article, Book format, or both? Shared criteria adopted for the double doctoral thesis format and language in a European/International joint networked Ph.D. program. Annamaria Silvana de Rosa Program Director of the European/International Joint PhD in Social Representations and Communication (SoReCom Joint IDP-PEOPLE ITN) Rector s Delegate for EUA-CDE - Sapienza University of Rome annamaria.derosa@uniroma1.it EUA-CDE 7th Workshop The Outcomes of Doctoral Education Izmir, Turkey, January,

2 Article, Book format, or both? Shared criteria adopted for the double doctoral thesis format and language in a European/International joint networked Ph.D. program. ABSTRACT The paper discusses the issue of the doctoral thesis format in the light of the current debate about the outcomes of the doctoral education and the changing scenario of the career prospects for the PhD holders both in and outside academic context. Although as stated in the EUA-CDE workshop call for paper - only a small minority of doctorate holders have traditional research careers and therefore the definition of outcomes of doctoral education has become increasingly relevant, the doctoral degree is still obtained through rigorous research presented in the form of a thesis. At the same time there is a diffused trend to move from the traditional format of the thesis to the collection of articles to varying degrees according to the disciplines, countries and institutions. This trend is discussed enlightening the new assessment culture that skews evaluations towards approaches, which also in the social sciences are seen as more likely to fit with natural sciences. The progressive de-evaluation of the book format in favor of collection of articles is coherent with an academic culture that is more and more dominated by the quantification ethos of scientific output, assessed with bibliometric indicators. The competitive pressure to publication occurs in the changing scenario of the editorial world in the digital era and in a climate where new tools for disseminating knowledge are constrained by the impetus for fast and short communication, although scientists are well aware that thinking, creating, innovating and disseminating scientific knowledge is not just twitting. A recent document elaborated by internationally recognised social psychologists convened to reflect on the new conformism dominating the research practices in social psychology and to raise a debate within the EASP, state: excellence and quality seem increasingly equated with scientism resulting in publications of brief research reports and the use of limited criteria for deciding about careers, prestige and funding. Scientific quality is critical for the viability of any discipline and for making an informed and responsible contribution to societal debates. But the sole emphasis on number of publications, impact factors, H- index and the like, contributes to an unwelcome homogenisation of the field in general, and of European social psychology in particular. Welcoming the EUA-CDE workshop invitation for papers that present systematic approaches to using doctoral education for innovation (for example in collaborative programs), our contribution is aimed to share expertise and experience regarding all the seven issues listed in the call for papers, with particular attention to the first three points: form of the thesis, joint program and language. Leading since 1993 a European/International joint networked Ph.D. program has been not only a privileged arena to discuss, define and adopt shared criteria for the doctoral thesis (and its double book and article formats and language) in our Joint Doctorate, but it is also a top observatory of the changing practices ongoing in the doctoral research training in the various countries and institutions involved in the program All contents and images are protected by de Rosa,A.S. (2014) European Ph.D on S.R.& C. copyright.

3 * to discuss the issue of the doctoral thesis format in the light of the current debate about the outcomes of the doctoral educa4on and the changing scenario of the career prospects for the PhD holders both in and outside academic context; * to share exper4se and experience Aims regarding the: format of the thesis and language in a joint interna4onal doctoral program, welcoming the EUA- CDE workshop invita4on for presen4ng systema4c approaches in collabora4ve networked programs. All contents and images are protected by de Rosa,A.S. (2014) European Ph.D on S.R.& C. copyright

4 a privileged arena Leading since 1993 a European/ Interna4onal joint networked Ph.D. program has been not only a privileged arena to discuss, define and adopt shared criteria for the doctoral thesis (and its double book and ar4cle formats and language) in our Joint Interna4onal Doctorate, a top observatory but also a top observatory of the changing prac4ces ongoing in the doctoral research training in the various countries and ins4tu4ons involved in the program and to monitor their change over a 4me period of more than 20 years. All contents and images are protected by de Rosa,A.S. (2014) European Ph.D on S.R.& C. copyright

5 SoRCom JOINT IDP PEOPLE-ITN the last step of our Institutional History and Recognition from DGXII - Research DGXXII- Education SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH FOREIGN AFFAIRS MINISTRY E.U. AUTONOMY AUTHONOMY REGULATION on DOCTORATE University The history of the European Ph.D. on Social Representations and Communication program since its birth in 1993 includes institutional recognition and didactic accreditation within four institutional scenarios: European Commission (DG-Education and DG-Research) Ministries of Scientific Research Universities Larger Scientific Community Larger Scientific Community All contents and images are protected by European Ph.D on S.R.& C. copyright

6 : 20 years of Institutional History of the and Recognition by!

7

8 Opening to Institutional Co-operation OUTSIDE THE ACADEMIC BORDERS Entrepreneurial Partners, Public Research Centre and Research Foundation co-operating with the European Ph.D. on Social Representations and Communication All contents and images are protected by European Ph.D on S.R.& C. copyrightr

9 The So.Re.Com. Thematic Network of Excellence the unique transnational Social Science network of networks approved by linking the worldwide Scientific Community inspired by Social Representations and Communication studies

10 The So.Re.Com.THEmatic NETwork at a glance: the European countries of partner Institutions

11 The So.Re.Com.THEmatic NETwork at a glance on global scenario

12 3 main axes of So.Re.Com. Infrastructure Scientific DOCUMENTATION Interactive NETWORKING Research TRAINING

13 The So.Re.Com. Joint IDP Built on the experience of both the European/ Interna;onal joint PhD in Social Representa;ons and Communica;on, awarding a recognised joint degree since 1996 (hhp:// and the EU approved So.Re.Com. THEma;c NETwork (hhp:// headquartered at the state of the art Social Representa;ons and Communica;on Research Centre and Mul;media Lab of Sapienza University of Rome, the SoReComJoint- IDP approved by the EC as the best Innova;ve Doctoral Program among the 1147 submihed proposals within the 2013 People call (total mark 98,80/100) includes: 8 EU universi4es, 2 private companies and 1 public research ins4tute in 8 European countries (AT, CH, CZ, ES, FR, IT, RO, SE), and 6 Extra- EU universi4es in United States, Canada, Brazil, Argen4na, Mexico and China. All contents and images are protected by de Rosa,A.S. (2014) European Ph.D on S.R.& C. copyright

14 Evaluation Report All contents and images are protected by European Ph.D on S.R.& C. copyright

15 Evaluation Report All contents and images are protected by European Ph.D on S.R.& C. copyright

16 The SoReComJoint-IDP institutional network

17 The So.Re.Com. Joint IDP, a privileged arena for defining and adopting shared criteria for the doctoral thesis format and language With so many ins4tu4ons (24 Universi4es in, 1 Na4onal Research Ins4tute, and 2 SMEs), opera4ng in different countries (10 EU and 6 extra- EU countries), with different na4onal languages, regula4ons, training and evalua4ng prac4ce tradi4ons, the iden4fica4on of the format and language policy for the disserta4on produc4on and evalua4on was a must since the beginning. Therefore to discuss, define, adopt jointly established criteria for the doctoral thesis format and language has been a compulsory step of the founding process of our Joint Interna4onal Doctorate clearly indicated in the Inter- Ins4tu4onal Agreement. All contents and images are protected by de Rosa,A.S. (2007) European Ph.D on S.R.& C. copyright

18 "Joint Diploma: the end starts from the beginning All contents and images are protected by de Rosa,A.S. (2007) European Ph.D on S.R.& C. copyright

19 Collaborative Internationalized Doctorate The "musts" for establishing QUALITY CONTROL and Evaluation System obligations and rights for both research trainees and tutors consistent with the Regulations at home and host institutions and shared dispositions clearly indicated in the Inter-Institutional Agreement Joint European/International Doctorate consistent with the Regulations jointly established at network level (including entrepreneurial partners, if any) and clearly indicated in the multilateral Inter-Institutional Agreement individual training agreement monitoring process, timeline and evaluation tools to be signed by the research trainee, the programme coordinator and the tutors at home and host institutions, including entrepreneurial partners (if any) to be established in accordance with the dispositions at the awarding institution and with the individual training agreement for joint supervision to be signed by the research trainee, the network programme coordinator and the tutors at home and host institutions, including entrepreneurial partners (if any) on-going face-to-face and online evaluation of the trainee s progress to be jointly established and implemented at network level, including: timeline, online evaluation tools to be filled by the three tutor to provide feedback on progress reports at least on yearly basis on the personalised web space for each research trainee Intellectual Property Right to be detailed in the individual training agreement to be detailed in the individual training agreement evaluation of PhD dissertation International Final Jury career development plan Quality Evaluation Board the International Final Jury in accordance with the regulations of the awarding institution, also including at least 1 member of the scientific board of the collaborative doctorates and 1 external internationally recognised expert to be encouraged as good practice adopted at each collaborative doctorate at each collaborative doctorate according to own institution s rules Multi-step evaluation process: a) authorisation by the three tutors to defend the thesis in front of the International Final Jury; b) in accordance with the regulations of the joint doctorate, including at least 3 members belonging to the network scientific board and 2 internationally recognised experts from outside the network, designated by the participating universities. The thesis supervisors shall participate in the discussion, but not in the final evaluation. career development plan for career prospect in and outside academia at network level for each individual research trainee, which continues to be monitored after his/her degree via Alumni Organisation. multilevel evaluation process by: Network Quality Board Coordinating Institution Doctoral Committee Independent Evaluation Committee

20 Collaborative Internationalized Doctorate The "musts" for establishing Joint European/International Doctorate research environment joint supervision agreement international mobility (both physical and virtual) International Summer Schools Lab Meetings, Joint Labs language for courses language policy for thesis format for dissertation credits (if any: controversial issue) TRAINING collaboration between existing doctoral programs in different institutions main tutor at home institution and co-tutor/s at host institution/s, clearly designated and indicated in the individual training agreement for each research trainee compulsory as strategic tool for the joint research training and not a sufficient requirement to obtain the Additional Certificate to the Diploma not compulsory: courses and didactic activities at home and at host institutions (during the mobility period) as available at home and host institutions or as agreed on the basis of shared criteria shared criteria to be clearly indicated in the Inter-Institutional Agreement shared criteria to be clearly indicated in the Inter-Institutional Agreement not compulsory, however if implemented: E.C.T.S. as system for transfer of learning outcomes research training integrated structured programme built-up on internationally recognised research institutional networks: access to complementary expertise and collaborative trans-national research teams multiple supervision: at least 1 main tutor and 2 cotutors belonging to partner institutions in 3 different countries, clearly indicated in the individual training Benefits of a variety of methodological compulsory as strategic agreement tool for the joint research approaches training and not and a complementary sufficient requirement to obtain the Joint Degree compulsory, due to the integrated and structured nature of the program jointly established criteria to be clearly indicated in the Inter-Institutional Agreement jointly established criteria to be clearly indicated in the Inter-Institutional Agreement jointly established criteria to be clearly indicated in the Inter-Institutional Agreement not compulsory, however if implemented: E.C.S. (without T) specifically designed and jointly adopted as system for accumulation rather than for transfer

21 Background Papers to learn more

22 Background Papers to learn more

23 Background Papers to learn more

24 Background Papers to learn more

25 Structured into transnational teams by common research area and complementary multi-methodological approaches, this SoReComJointIDP guarantees a well-tested training structure including: an innovative integrated physical and virtual campus, where world-class academic scientists, internationally recognised experts, experienced researchers and ESR cooperate face-to face and online for and by research multiple supervision via tutoring and co-tutoring by at least three tutors in different countries; individual mobility for ESR at research centres for secondments collective international mobility of trainees and teaching staff during International Summer Schools and Lab meetings So.Re.Com. Joint IDP AIMS learning by doing (including transferable skills) in academic and non-academic settings; worldwide access to common web platform, as tool for documentation, networking, training and monitoring trainees progress quality evaluation system officialisation of the joint degree active integration in the world-wide SoReCom THEmatic NETwork enhancement of career prospects both in and outside academia All contents and images are protected by European Ph.D on S.R.& C. copyright

26 The European/International Joint Ph.D. on Social Representations and Communication Research Centre and Multimedia Lab

27 The European/International Joint Ph.D. on Social Representations and Communication Research Centre and Multimedia Lab

28 So.Re.Com. Joint-IDP dedicated web-platform for documentation, training and networking

29 Jointly established and shared criteria for the DOUBLE doctoral THESIS FORMAT BOOK format : full report as extended version of the dissertation. In terms of length, the full doctoral thesis should be of at least 150 pages, excluding the appendix. The theses defended in a Book format include a number of pages comprised between 250 and 480. Article format: All contents and images are protected by European Ph.D on S.R.& C. copyright short version of the dissertation. The length of the short version should conform to the standards set out in the notes for contributors of the international journal E.J.S.P. Upon agreement of the three tutors, it should be evaluated by the International Evaluation Board (Final Jury) ready to be submitted to international journals and accepted by qualified peer-reviewers.

30 Jointly established and shared criteria for the thesis LANGUAGE initially adopted formula and new trends the full report of the dissertation (book format) should be in English or in a national language of the host country where the doctorate is being pursued (site of the national tutor acting as main supervisor). This is to be evaluated by the national tutor/s. In the recent years there is a trend to write the full report always in English, both for publication purpose and as natural outcome of the co-tutoring tryadic system (1 main tutor and 2 co-tutors from three different countries). the short version (article format) should be in English, in order to be evaluated by the members of the International Final Jury (upon the approval of the three tutors), according to the multi-step evaluation process. All contents and images are protected by European Ph.D on S.R.& C. copyright

31 Quality Control and On-Line Monitoring System via personalised web site for each research trainee All contents and images are protected by European Ph.D on S.R.& C. copyright

32 Main elements of the SoReCom Joint IDP integrated physical and virtual campus The complementary on- line and face- to- face structured training ac4vi4es include: a) an integrated physical and virtual campus, where world- class scien;sts and early- stage- researchers cooperate face- to face and on- line for and by research; b) mul4ple supervision in different countries; c) individual mobility for early stage researchers for secondments; d) collec4ve interna4onal mobility of trainees and teaching staff during Interna4onal Summer Schools and Winter/Spring Sessions of Lab mee4ngs; e) worldwide access to common dedicated web plaeorm, as tool for documenta4on, networking, training and a personalized web- space for monitoring trainees progress by the three tutors and the members of the Interna;onal Jury, who are given access to the on- line evalua4on forms of the full report on the thesis and the short ar;cle. It also allows trainees their 4meline work plan management and to rate and provide feedbacks on training ac4vi4es. All contents and images are protected by de Rosa,A.S. (2007) European Ph.D on S.R.& C. copyright

33 Snapshots from the 2013 Thesis Defence All contents and images are protected by European Ph.D on S.R.& C. copyright

34 So.Re.Com. Joint IDP: a top observatory of the changing practices in a new academic assessment culture The doctoral degree is s4ll obtained through rigorous research presented in the form of a thesis, however there is a diffused trend to move from the tradi4onal format of the thesis to the collec4on of ar4cles to varying degrees according to the disciplines, countries and ins4tu4ons. All contents and images are protected by de Rosa,A.S. (2007) European Ph.D on S.R.& C. copyright

35 a new academic assessment culture and changing scenario of the editorial world in the digital era the progressive de- evalua4on of the book format in favor of collec4on of ar4cles is coherent with an academic culture that is more and more dominated by the quan4fica4on ethos of scien4fic output, assessed with bibliometric indicators; the compe44ve pressure to publica4on occurs in the changing scenario of the editorial world in the digital era and in a climate where new tools for dissemina4ng knowledge are constrained by the impetus for fast and short communica4on, although scien4sts are well aware that thinking, crea4ng, innova4ng and dissemina4ng scien4fic knowledge is not just twi$ng. All contents and images are protected by de Rosa,A.S. (2007) European Ph.D on S.R.& C. copyright

36 To produce and to disseminate scien4fic knowledge is not just twi$ng a new academic assessment culture and changing scenario of the editorial world in the digital era knowledge in word s number: how many??? Book or Ar4cle Format: Both??? or in Between format: the new mid- form output??? All contents and images are protected by de Rosa,A.S. (2007) European Ph.D on S.R.& C. copyright

37 The mid- form output launched by Palgrave Pivot in 2012: an innova4ve format for scholarly research. What s going on in the changing scenario of the editorial world in the digital era All contents and images are protected by de Rosa,A.S. (2007) European Ph.D on S.R.& C. copyright

38 A recent document elaborated by interna4onally recognised social psychologists convened to reflect on the new conformism domina4ng the research prac4ces in social psychology and to raise a debate within the EASP (Opinion piece for the Bulletin of the European Association of Social Psychology, September 30, 2013), states: Providing tools and critical view on the new academic assessment culture excellence and quality seem increasingly equated with scien4sm resul4ng in publica4ons of brief research reports and the use of limited criteria for deciding about careers, pres4ge and funding. Scien4fic quality is cri4cal for the viability of any discipline and for making an informed and responsible contribu4on to societal debates. But the sole emphasis on number of publica4ons, impact factors, H- index and the like, contributes to an unwelcome homogenisa4on of the field in general, and of European social psychology in par4cular. All contents and images are protected by de Rosa,A.S. (2014) European Ph.D on S.R.& C. copyright

39 Providing tools and critical view on the new academic assessment culture All contents and images are protected by de Rosa,A.S. (2007) European Ph.D on S.R.& C. copyright

40 Providing tools and critical view on the new academic assessment culture All contents and images are protected by de Rosa,A.S. (2007) European Ph.D on S.R.& C. copyright

41 Providing tools and critical view on the new academic assessment culture All contents and images are protected by de Rosa,A.S. (2007) European Ph.D on S.R.& C. copyright

42 Providing tools and critical view on the new academic assessment culture All contents and images are protected by de Rosa,A.S. (2007) European Ph.D on S.R.& C. copyright

43 Providing tools and critical view on the new academic assessment culture All contents and images are protected by de Rosa,A.S. (2007) European Ph.D on S.R.& C. copyright

44 Providing tools and critical view on the new academic assessment culture All contents and images are protected by de Rosa,A.S. (2007) European Ph.D on S.R.& C. copyright

45 San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment: Puttin sciences into the assessment of research December 16, 2012 San$Francisco$Declaration$on$Research$Assessment$ Putting'science'into'the'assessment'of'research' There is a pressing need to improve the ways in which the output of scientific research is evaluated by funding agencies, academic institutions, and other parties. Providing tools and Providing critical view tools and critical view on the new academic on the assessment new academic culture assessment culture To address this issue, a group of editors and publishers of scholarly journals met during the Annual Meeting of The American Society for Cell Biology (ASCB) in San Francisco, CA, on December 16, The group developed a set of recommendations, referred to as the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment. We invite interested parties across all scientific disciplines to indicate their support by adding their names to this Declaration. The outputs from scientific research are many and varied, including: research articles reporting new knowledge, data, reagents, and software; intellectual property; and highly trained young scientists. Funding agencies, institutions that employ scientists, and scientists themselves, all have a desire, and need, to assess the quality and impact of scientific outputs. It is thus imperative that scientific output is measured accurately and evaluated wisely. The Journal Impact Factor is frequently used as the primary parameter with which to compare the scientific output of individuals and institutions. The Journal Impact Factor, as calculated by Thomson Reuters, was originally created as a tool to help librarians identify journals to purchase, not as a measure of the scientific quality of research in an article. With that in mind, it is critical to understand that the Journal Impact Factor has a number of well-documented deficiencies as a tool for research assessment. These limitations include: A) citation distributions within journals are highly skewed [1 3]; B) the properties of the Journal Impact Factor are field-specific: it is a composite of multiple, highly diverse article types, including primary research papers and reviews [1, 4]; C) Journal Impact Factors can be manipulated (or gamed ) by editorial policy [5]; and D) data used to calculate the Journal Impact Factors are neither transparent nor openly available to the public [4, 6, 7]. Below we make a number of recommendations for improving the way in which the quality of research output is evaluated. Outputs other than research articles will grow in importance in assessing research effectiveness in the future, but the peer-reviewed research paper will remain a central research output that informs research assessment. Our recommendations therefore focus primarily on practices relating to research articles published in peer-reviewed journals but can and should be extended by recognizing additional products, such as datasets, as important research outputs. These recommendations are aimed at funding agencies, academic institutions, journals, organizations that supply metrics, and individual researchers. A number of themes run through these recommendations:! the need to eliminate the use of journal-based metrics, such as Journal Impact Factors, in funding, appointment, and promotion considerations;! the need to assess research on its own merits rather than on the basis of the journal in which the research is published; and All contents and images are protected by de Rosa,A.S. (2007) European Ph.D on S.R.& C. copyright

46 Osservazioni sui Criteri per la valutazione dei prodotti di ricerca proposti dal panel di Psicologia del Gruppo di Esperti della Valutazione dell area 11 (GEV-11) In relazione alla recente pubblicazione dei Criteri per la valutazione dei prodotti di ricerca proposti dal panel di Psicologia del Gruppo di Esperti della Valutazione dell area 11 (GEV-11), l Associazione Italiana di Psicologia (AIP) conferma il proprio sostegno ai principi di valutazione della qualità e di valorizzazione del merito, e la progressiva adozione dei criteri in uso presso la comunità scientifica internazionale. Providing tools and Providing critical view tools and critical view on the new academic on the assessment new academic culture assessment culture L'AIP inoltre sottolinea la necessità che la specificità delle diverse aree disciplinari e di ricerca della psicologia sia tutelata e valorizzata. Riconoscendo la complessità dell algoritmo, che il Panel di Psicologia ha adottato insieme ai GEV delle altre aree che hanno scelto la valutazione bibliometrica, e consapevole del carattere sperimentale della sua prima applicazione, l AIP (i) chiede un attento monitoraggio e una costante verifica affinché i risultati corrispondano a quanto atteso sulla base dei principi condivisi all interno del panel e i migliori prodotti delle diverse aree psicologiche siano correttamente collocati; (ii) condivide la scelta del panel di prevedere aggiustamenti e correzioni volti a migliorare l applicazione dell algoritmo con l obiettivo di saturare le diverse fasce e ottenere una adeguata visibilità del contributo scientifico dei diversi settori della psicologia. (iii) propone che siano adottati i seguenti suggerimenti 1. L uso di un indice di impatto con finestra temporale inferiore (Immediacy Impact Factor o 2-year Impact Factor) nel caso di riviste di recente pubblicazione; 2. L uso di ulteriori banche dati come Google Scholar per il calcolo delle citazioni e PsycInfo per la copertura delle riviste italiane per le quali non si può escludere a priori il posizionamento nelle prime due fasce di merito; 3. L accesso fino alla fascia A dei volumi e fino alla fascia B dei capitoli di libri, indipendentemente dalla lingua in cui sono redatti, fatto salvo il principio di una maggior valorizzazione dei volumi e dei prodotti a diffusione internazionale; 4. che sia valutato il grado di diffusione nazionale o internazionale di un prodotto indipendentemente dalla lingua (prodotti in inglese possono essere a diffusione nazionale; prodotti in lingua diversa dall inglese possono essere classificati come internazionali); 5. che la valutazione bibliometrica sia estesa a tutti i prodotti pubblicati su riviste appartenenti a Subject Categories non incluse nell elenco delle categorie predisposto dai Gev che utilizzano l algoritmo. In conclusione, coerentemente con quanto da sempre sostenuto nei suoi documenti ufficiali, l AIP ribadisce che i criteri e i metodi utilizzati per valutare i prodotti e le strutture non possono essere utilizzati per la valutazione dei singoli ricercatori e con altre finalità (abilitazione, concorsi, scatti stipendiali), né allo scopo di distribuire risorse fra i Dipartimenti. L'algoritmo sperimentalmente adottato dal Panel di Psicologia, infatti, pur consentendo una valutazione intra-disciplinare, mal si adatta a quella inter-disciplinare o inter-settoriale e cioè alla distribuzione delle risorse tra le persone nei dipartimenti e tra i Dipartimenti stessi. A tale scopo, quindi, dovranno essere adottati criteri diversi, maggiormente rispettosi delle specificità disciplinari e delle singole linee di ricerca. Mentre i principi bibliometrici possono essere gli stessi, gli algoritmi e i risultati di specifiche valutazioni non possono essere estesi ad altri contesti. Il principio della distinzione tra la valutazione delle strutture e la valutazione delle persone è stato più volte affermato anche da parte degli organismi nazionali di valutazione, ma è evidente il rischio di una loro sovrapposizione date le strette connessioni della pratica accademica. E un fatto, ad esempio, che il Decreto Ministeriale del 5 ottobre 2011, su criteri e parametri per la valutazione dei candidati, all'art.4, lettera C, in All contents and images are protected by de Rosa,A.S. (2007) European Ph.D on S.R.& C. copyright