EVALUATION OF THE RESEARCH IN THE DEPARTMENTS OF EDUCATION AND PSYCHOLOGY AT THE UNIVERSITY OF JOENSUU

Transcription

1 EVALUATION OF THE RESEARCH IN THE DEPARTMENTS OF EDUCATION AND PSYCHOLOGY AT THE UNIVERSITY OF JOENSUU GENERAL COMMENTS To The Rector The Rector and Vice-Rector are commended for identifying the pursuit of science as an important part of the mission of the University of Joensuu. Specifically, they have identified the pursuit of research as demonstrated via conducting research, pursuing and securing external research funds, and publishing in high-quality international journals as high priority activities of university research faculty (i.e. Professors, Senior Researchers, and Post-Doctoral Researchers). Moreover, the Rector s office has supported through financial resources the development of two Centres of Competence to facilitate the research endeavours of the Faculty of Education. Nonetheless, in order to ensure the transition of the Faculty of Education to a faculty capable of conducting significant research for the Finnish and international audiences, the review panel recommends that the Rector s office provide additional support. Specifically, the panel recommends the following: 1. State expectations for acceptable levels of productivity for research effort and publishing in international journals. 2. Provide financial support to the Faculty of Education for hiring researchers from other universities to mentor University of Joensuu Faculty of Education in applying for grants from the Academy of Finland and other funding sources. 3. Allow differentiated assignments so that the Faculty and the reviewed departments can maximize their strengths whether they are in research, teaching or administration. To the Dean The Dean of the Faculty of Education is commended for supporting the research initiative at the University of Joensuu. Based on our observation the Dean has the support of the Professors and other research faculty, has worked with the Department Heads to nurture the research efforts of the faculty, is knowledgeable about the research topics of individual faculty members, and has assisted the efforts of the two Centres of Excellence located in the Faculty of Education. Yet, as the Faculty of Education moves to assuming a more significant and comprehensive role in research further effort from the Dean will be required. Specifically, the panel recommends that the Dean in concert with the Department Heads: 1. Establish expectations for acceptable levels of productivity for research effort, pursuit of external funds, and publishing in international journals.

2 2. Write a detailed research strategy that identifies an action plan to move the Faculty towards achieving more productive research outcomes. 3. Encourage the Faculty to focus their research efforts on the most significant educational and psychological issues that are impacting Finnish students, families, teachers, school administrators, and communities. Form research groups that can be responsive to these educational and societal issues. 4. Maximize the research efforts of the two newly established Centres of Competence by monitoring the outputs of the Centres. 5. Facilitate the development of more rigorous doctoral study programs which include a core set of courses and research experiences. 6. Increase the importance of quantitative, longitudinal and cross-cultural research methods and decrease the importance of qualitative and descriptive research methods. 7. Hire faculty as professors who can meet international standards in research, writing, securing external research funds and doctoral supervision. 8. Doctoral students should write at least one international peer reviewed publication prior to defending their dissertation. A BIBLIOMETRIC ANALYSIS One of the most key problems, we were able to identify, is quite uncritical reliance exclusively on quantitative indicators of research performance. Self-reports that were prepared by the departments and research units were based on quite uncritical interpretation of the initial ERIH (European Reference Index for the Humanities) list of journals for pedagogical and educational research which has been released by the European Science Foundation in According to these loose criteria educational scientists in the University of Joensuu published in 2006 more domestic (95) and foreign (54) research papers in educational science than other comparable departments in Finnish universities (Jyväskylä 69/55, Oulu 53/36, Turku 52/57, and Tampere 70/39). Paradoxically, there were a disproportional small number of doctoral theses in the field of education defended in the University of Joensuu (6) during 2006 compared, for example, to 15 in Jyväskylä and 12 dissertations in Tampere. Even a more dramatic discrepancy between the indicators of publications and the actual research performance was in the success rate of external funding. According to provided statistics, the Faculty of Education in Joensuu received 22K EUR from the Finnish Academy in 2006 which is one-tenth the amount received by other educational departments from other Finnish universities (Helsinki 529, Jyväskylä 290, Oulu 366, Turku 330, and Tampere 224). This all indicates that used indicators of the quantity of publications may be misleading and do not reflect their actual quality and impact. The discrepancy between the used indicators and actual research performance appears to be even more detrimental since it has served as a misleading guideline for the research strategy by putting the main emphasis on the number of publications, not their quality and international visibility. The instructions given to evaluators explicitly said that high international level is defined by works which are recognized as a major contribution within international academic 2

3 communities and which could, if offered, be published by the leading international publishers or in the leading international journals. One of the most reliable proofs of recognition from international academic communities is publication of papers in journals indexed by the Web of Science (Thomson Reuters) and their citation by other papers published in these journals. During 2000 to 2008 (September 6th) there were 2,205 papers published by authors at least one of which was affiliated with the University of Joensuu. These 2,205 papers were cited 13,936 times which makes 6.32 citations per each article. The largest proportion of these papers was published in the fields of forestry (315), optics (208), environmental science (197), ecology (186), and inorganic and molecular chemistry (167). There were 29 papers classified into one of the fields of education or educational research. The citation number of these papers was 23, that is 0.8 citations per paper. There were also 48 papers that can be classified into one of the fields in psychology (experimental, clinical, social, educational etc.) which were cited 277 times (5.8 per paper). These numbers indicate that psychology does relatively well in terms of the number of publications and their citations compared to the educational science in the University of Joensuu. The authors of this report are fully aware that the Web of Science may be not representative to certain fields including educational research. For that reason it would be more appropriate to observe research performance according to more specialized databases which take beside peer-reviewed international journals into account also monographs, books, conference proceedings etc. The most representative database for the educational sciences is ERIC (Current Index to Journal in Education) which is regarded as the most representative collection of work done in educational sciences. Although University of Joensuu currently employs 18 professors in the field of Educational Sciences (kasvatustieteet) they and their associates were able to publish only 27 papers which were indexed in ERIC. We have a reasonable ground to believe that this number is very modest at best. It would be easy to look for the publication record of the most productive educational researchers in Finland and observe that each of them alone has been publishing more papers in journals or books indexed by ERIC than all educational scientists from the Faculty of Education at the University of Joensuu all together. This is not to say that all these papers and books published by educational researchers from Joensuu are useless or lacking any scientific or practical value. They might and certainly have importance but they contribute very little to knowledge shared by the international academic community. 3

4 EVALUATION OF THE RESEARCH IN THE DEPARTMENT OF SPECIAL EDUCATION OVERWIEV Over the past few years the Department of Special Education has undergone significant personnel changes, specifically three professors retired and three were hired. The Department shows strength in the three areas they focus their research efforts on: 1. Learning disabilities, learning and well-being 2. Communication, interaction and empowering learning environments 3. Special educational support and marginalization. The research can be characterized as descriptive and longitudinal in nature. The Department should consider focusing on the most critical issues facing Finnish education of children with special needs including intervention, service delivery system and inclusion of children with special needs. RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURE Strengths: The personnel have methodological strengths. The personnel are sufficient to carry out their research mission. The doctoral students are committed. Weaknesses: The amount of external funding is low. There is no explicit strategy for applying for funding. The Department has not much experience for acquiring for external funds. Recommendations: The Department is recommended to increase the level of external funding and to collaborate with active research units. The Department is recommende to apply to become a Centre of Excellence, and focus on critical needs in the Finnish special education. QUALITY OF RESEARCH AND AREAS OF RESEARCH EXCELLENCE Strengths: Engagement in longitudinal research. Topics of research are important to the profession. The research conducted in dyslexia is important and the results of it are published to an international audience. There is a strong potential for improving the level of research and publications. Weaknesses: The amount of publications and especially international refereed highquality publications is low. There is a need to focus on intervention type of research. Some of the research topics of the Department are outdated, for example facilitated communication. 4

5 Recommendations: The Department should focus on issues important in Finnish special education. There is a need to publish more and in higher quality international research journals. The resources should be used more efficiently. The doctoral students should be writing earlier in their programme. RESEARCH STRATEGY Strengths: The Department has integrated the doctoral students in the research. Weaknesses: There is no written plan for research strategy. Six research groups appear to be too many for three professors to manage. Recommendations: The Department is recommended to explore how to improve the quality and preparation of special education teachers. The Department should consider limiting the number of research topics. The Department is recommended to agree on a plan of action to implement a research strategy. INTERNATIONAL ACTIVITIES Strengths: Significant involvement in international teacher training and development projects. Weaknesses: No published research on the international teacher training and development projects. The Department is not active in coordinating or leading international research. There is no exchange of researchers. Recommendations: If the Department continues their involvement in international projects, they should add a research component in them. The Department is recommended to add cross-cultural research component in the research. NATIONAL COOPERATION Strengths: The Department is cooperating nationally, for example with Kuopio and Jyväskylä. The Department cooperates also within the university (for example the technological component in one of the research projects). Weaknesses: The cooperation has focused more on development activities than research activities. Recommendations: The Department is recommended to widen the cooperation with the Department of Psychology and medical experts. 5

6 GRADING: 1. Research infrastructure: 4 2a. Standard of research at national level: 4 2b. Standard of research at international level: 2 3. Research strategy: 3 4. International activities: 3 5. National co-operation: 5 6. International co-operation: 3 GENERAL ESTIMATION: 4 EVALUATION OF THE RESEARCH IN THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND ADULT EDUCATION OVERWIEV Personnel evidence a strong commitment in their areas of study and to students with which they are working. The personnel have focused their efforts on counselling, pedagogical ethics, and educational reform in Finland and they have demonstrated their ability to publish in Finnish journals and monographs. Unfortunately the quality and quantity of research directed to an international audience has been low. RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURE Strengths: The personnel are competent in their areas of expertise. The personnel show real commitment to their areas and spend significant amounts of time on their projects. The physical, library and computer facilities are in place to conduct the research. Weaknesses: Although the funding level has remained constant the department does not show a leading role in applying for external funding. Although the department acknowledges the need for external funding they have not developed a plan to apply for external funding. There appears to be lack focus on research. The work time appears to be poorly allocated. Recommendation: The Department is recommended to focus on the funding: there is a need to learn to write research proposals and work with individuals successful in grant writing. There is a need to identify topics worthy of external funding. The personnel are recommended to pay attention to their time allocation and place more importance on research activities. 6

7 QUALITY OF RESEARCH AND AREAS OF RESEARCH EXCELLENCE Strengths: The department has demonstrated effort in publishing articles and monographs for Finnish audiences. Weaknesses: The research lacks a certain level of originality and innovativeness. The publication frequency in international journals is low. The research lacks theoretical and practical educational significance. Recommendation: The Department is recommended to focus on research topics that would be of interest to an international audience. RESEARCH STRATEGY Strengths: The Department has recognized their weaknesses. The Department has acknowledged the need for a research strategy as well as the need to reduce the number of research topics. Weaknesses: The Department lacks a well planned research strategy. Recommendation: The Department needs to work on a well planned research strategy. INTERNATIONAL ACTIVITIES Strengths: - Weaknesses: The Department is not involved in international activities such as research exchange, student exchange, cooperative research and writing activities. Recommendation: The Department should put greater emphasis on working and strengthening international activities by developing international networks. NATIONAL COOPERATION Strengths: The Department has interdisciplinary cooperation with other Finnish, newly established Competence Centres. Weaknesses: Although the Department has activities at national level, the activities are restricted to staff development and product development activities not in research projects. 7

8 Recommendations: The Department is recommended to develop national university level partnerships that are directed to research outcomes. The Department should become fully engaged with two Competence Centres that are established. GRADING : 1. Research infrastructure: 4 2a. Standard of research at national level: 5 2b. Standard of research at international level: 1 3. Research strategy: 2 4. International activities: 1 5. National cooperation: 3 6. International cooperation: 1 GENERAL ESTIMATION: 2 EVALUATION OF THE RESEARCH IN THE DEPARTMENT OF APPLIED EDUCATION OVERWIEV The Department of Applied Education s research effort encompasses a significant and broad area of education ranging from arts and music to the sciences. The Department has demonstrated a major commitment to preparing secondary education teachers and has expended significant efforts in their research. The research can be described as descriptive and qualitative, with efforts focusing on many national and international topics. Unfortunately, the research topics do not align with areas that are significant for external funding. The Department has not secured the external funds to support the research and the articles have not been published in high quality international journals. However they have numerous national publications. There is a need for clarification of what are the research expectations for professors and other research staff in the Department. RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURE Strengths: The personnel have good access to journals and the software is acceptable. The personnel are committed to conducting research. The Department has acknowledged the need to publish internationally. The time allocation is adequate to engage in research. 8

9 Weaknesses: The primary weakness is low external funding. The amount of funding has dropped over the evaluation period. In addition, there is a low level of submitting for funding. Recommendation: The Department is recommended to begin to submit more research applications to Academy of Finland and other funding sources and start collaborating with researchers who are experienced in writing applications. QUALITY OF RESEARCH AND AREAS OF RESEARCH EXCELLENCE Strengths: Among the many research groups in the Department one of the most promising appears to be the research group that looks at pre-school education and school beginners; their work has promise for high quality publications in the future. In addition, the Department has the potential to respond to critical issues in information transmission and computing. Weaknesses: The research in the Department lacks a sound theoretical focus and fails to focus on important Finnish issues. On the whole, there is too much concentration on descriptive research and the publication level is low. There is also lack of interdisciplinary research and not much collaboration within the Department or within the University of Joensuu. Recommendation: The Department is recommended to develop pedagogical knowledge through research. The research active personnel need to develop interdisciplinary research groups within the university in such areas as Arts, Science, Maths and Humanities. There is a need to establish a forum to discuss and develop collaborative research. RESEARCH STRATEGY Strengths: The Department demonstrates work effort needed to develop a research strategy. The Department articulates a commitment to the pursuit of science. Weaknesses: The Department lacks a written or coherent research plan of action and has low performance expectations for research funding and writing. Recommendations: The Department needs to articulate the expectations for professors, senior research assistants and senior lecturers. The Department needs to meet and articulate a research strategy and the research plan needs to have specific measurable tasks and strategies. 9

10 INTERNATIONAL ACTIVITIES Strengths: The Department is actively engaged with international colleagues. International collaboration involves teacher training and product development. Weaknesses: The number and level of joint publications is very low. The international efforts do not include research studies. Recommendation: The Department is recommended to add research component to international activities and projects. NATIONAL COOPERATION Strengths: The Department is active in national cooperative efforts. Weaknesses: The Department lacks interdisciplinary research at national level as well as significant working relationship with other departments at the university. Recommendation: The Department needs to increase interdisciplinary contacts with other departments of the university, such as Arta, Science, Maths and Humanities. GRADING: 1. Research infrastructure: 4 2a. Standard of research at national level: 4 2b. Standard of research at international level: 1 3. Research strategy: 2 4. International activities: 2 5. National cooperation: 4 6. International cooperation: 3 GENERAL ESTIMATION: 3 EVALUATION OF THE RESEARCH IN THE SAVONLINNA DEPARTMENT OF TEACHER EDUCATION (SDTE) OVERWIEV SDTE research effort encompasses a significant and broad area of education ranging from Educational Sciences to Home Economics. The Department has a significant commitment to teacher preparation across several disciplines. The research can be 10

11 described as descriptive and qualitative focusing on the practical aspects of their disciplines. This research can have meaning to national and international audiences. Historically SDTE has not actively pursued external funding, although several department members articulated a plan to pursue such funds. RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURE Strengths: The personnel have good access to journals and the software is acceptable. The personnel are interested in conducting research. Weaknesses: The primary weakness is lowering of funds; the amount of funds has dropped down and the Department has not given a high priority for securing funding. Recommendation: The Department is recommended to begin to submit more research applications to Academy of Finland and start collaborating with people who are experienced in making applications QUALITY OF RESEARCH AND AREAS OF RESEARCH EXCELLENCE Strengths: Among the many research groups in the Department one of the most promising appears to be the Home Economics group with its interest in nutrition, household economics, and sustainability. This group has a collective promising area of research. Also the research done in the connection with Forestry is promising. Weaknesses: The research efforts of the Department do not align with the most pressing issues facing Finnish educators. Much of the research topics are marginal lacking in significance that merit publication in top level journals. Also, much of the research is characterized as descriptive and qualitative which lacks the rigor to publish in highquality international journals. The Department failed to maximize the seemingly high quality of the doctoral students. Recommendation: The Home Economics group needs to articulate a detailed research plan and to receive the necessary departmental support to pursue this plan. The Department should consider the issues of critical importance to Finnish education and pursue these issues through quantitative research methods and designs. The doctoral program can be strengthened by developing a common set of research and professional developmental courses. RESEARCH STRATEGY Strengths: The Home Economics group has begun to develop a research plan to secure external funding. 11

12 Weaknesses: Other then the Home Economics group the Department lacks a written or coherent research strategy or research plan of action. Additionally the Department has not articulated criteria for acceptable levels of research and writing. Recommendations: The Department needs to articulate the expectations for professors, senior research assistants and senior lecturers. The Department needs to meet and articulate the departmental research strategy and measurable plans of action. The department needs to reinforce promising efforts in Home Economics, Forestry, and Visual Arts. INTERNATIONAL ACTIVITIES Strengths: There is some evidence of collaborative efforts in nutrition and visual arts. Weaknesses: The number and level of international projects, publications, and departmental exchanges are marginal. Recommendations: The Department needs to increase international activities and projects and international writing activities. NATIONAL COOPERATION Strengths: The Department appears to be active in national cooperation. Weaknesses: There is a lack of interdisciplinary research at the national level. The Department lacks significant working relationship with the departments in the main campus. Recommendation: The Department is recommended to increase interdisciplinary contacts with other disciplines and with the Departments of the Faculty of Education in the main campus. GRADING: 1. Research infrastructure: 4 2a. Standard of research at national level: 3 2b. Standard of research at international level: 1 3. Research strategy: 4 4. International activities: 2 5. National cooperation: 3 6. International cooperation: 2 GENERAL ESTIMATION: 3 12

13 EVALUATION OF THE RESEARCH IN THE DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHOLOGY OVERWIEV: The Department has five well defined research areas including 1) life-course, career and family research, 2) school and social differences, 3) developmental research in counselling and psychotherapy, 4) organizational psychology and research into working life and 5) clinical psychology and interventions. These five areas are viewed form national and international viewpoint as significant topics of study. Although the current publication level is reasonable, it can be improved both quantitatively and qualitatively. The researchers of the Department are among the leading researcher of social psychology in Finland and well integrated in the network of Finnish psychological research and education. RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURE: Strengths: The personnel are competent in their areas of expertise and show real commitment to their areas. The personnel spend significant amount of time on working on their projects. The physical facilities, library facilities and computer facilities are satisfactory for conducting the composed research. Access to Psycho-net is important and excellent. Weaknesses: Although the Department has received some external funding their plans to increase it are limited due to low expectations for success. Recommendation: The Department needs to put forth an effort in applying for external funding. The Department is recommended to put forth effort in creating a more constructive attitude to cooperation and interaction. QUALITY OF RESEARCH AND AREAS OF RESEARCH EXCELLENCE: Strengths: The Department has well defined research programmes, which have theoretical and practical relevance. The research profile is well established. The Department demonstrates skills at times by publishing quality work in international journals. The research group of school and social differences has been consistently productive over period of time. 13

14 Weaknesses: The research personnel do not use their high level of competence across their research projects. The Department has not demonstrated their skills consistently across their research projects. Recommendation: The publishing rate should be demonstrated more evenly across the different research groups. RESEARCH STRATEGY: Strengths: Some of the research groups appear to have a research plan extending for several years. Weaknesses: There is a lack of an overall departmental research plan. The Department raised rational concerns because of university reform which have limited their ability to formulate the research plan. Recommendation: The Department is recommended to develop a detailed research plan for the whole Department that would include plans for the whole research group. INTERNATIONAL ACTIVITIES: Strengths: The Department has a history of being involved in some international projects. Weaknesses: The number of joint international publications is dropping. The Department is self-sufficient in terms of international exchanges and cooperation of international researchers. Recommendation: It is recommended that the Department puts forth more effort in developing international research activities and cooperation. Every research group should try to publish internationally. NATIONAL COOPERATION: Strengths: The Department is well integrated into national network of psychological research. Weaknesses: There is a lack of cooperation within the home university. Recommendation: The Department is recommended to develop a research agenda which is less sensitive to administrative reforms. 14

15 GRADING : 1. Research infrastructure: 4 2a. Standard of research at national level: 6 2b. Standard of research at international level: 5 3. Research strategy: 4 4. International activities: 2 5. National cooperation: 5 6. International cooperation: 2 GENERAL ESTIMATION: 5 15

16 Research infrastructure: Standard of research at national level: Standard of research at international level: APPENDIX: OVERALL GRADING Department Special Adult Applied Savonlinna Psychology Research strategy: International activities: National cooperation: International cooperation: GENERAL ESTIMATION: