Can research quality be measured quantitatively? On quality of scholarship, numerical research indicators and academic publishing - experiences from Norway

In this article I reflect on ways in which the neoliberal university and its administrative counterpart, new public management (NPM), affect academic publishing activity. One characteristic feature of NPM is the urge to use simple numerical indicators of research output as a tool to allocate fundin...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Michael Richard Handley Jones
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Geographical Society of Finland 2017-12-01
Series:Fennia: International Journal of Geography
Online Access:https://fennia.journal.fi/article/view/66602
id doaj-e255dd0a9c4445669f9f7bde05f03cfe
record_format Article
spelling doaj-e255dd0a9c4445669f9f7bde05f03cfe2020-11-25T03:39:54ZengGeographical Society of FinlandFennia: International Journal of Geography1798-56172017-12-01195210.11143/fennia.66602Can research quality be measured quantitatively? On quality of scholarship, numerical research indicators and academic publishing - experiences from NorwayMichael Richard Handley Jones In this article I reflect on ways in which the neoliberal university and its administrative counterpart, new public management (NPM), affect academic publishing activity. One characteristic feature of NPM is the urge to use simple numerical indicators of research output as a tool to allocate funding and, in practice if not in theory, as a means of assessing research quality. This ranges from the use of journal impact factors (IF) and ranking of journals to publication points to determine what types of work in publishing is counted as meritorious for funding allocation. I argue that it is a fallacy to attempt to assess quality of scholarship through quantitative measures of publication output. I base my arguments on my experiences of editing a Norwegian geographical journal over a period of 16 years, along with my experiences as a scholar working for many years within the Norwegian university system. https://fennia.journal.fi/article/view/66602
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Michael Richard Handley Jones
spellingShingle Michael Richard Handley Jones
Can research quality be measured quantitatively? On quality of scholarship, numerical research indicators and academic publishing - experiences from Norway
Fennia: International Journal of Geography
author_facet Michael Richard Handley Jones
author_sort Michael Richard Handley Jones
title Can research quality be measured quantitatively? On quality of scholarship, numerical research indicators and academic publishing - experiences from Norway
title_short Can research quality be measured quantitatively? On quality of scholarship, numerical research indicators and academic publishing - experiences from Norway
title_full Can research quality be measured quantitatively? On quality of scholarship, numerical research indicators and academic publishing - experiences from Norway
title_fullStr Can research quality be measured quantitatively? On quality of scholarship, numerical research indicators and academic publishing - experiences from Norway
title_full_unstemmed Can research quality be measured quantitatively? On quality of scholarship, numerical research indicators and academic publishing - experiences from Norway
title_sort can research quality be measured quantitatively? on quality of scholarship, numerical research indicators and academic publishing - experiences from norway
publisher Geographical Society of Finland
series Fennia: International Journal of Geography
issn 1798-5617
publishDate 2017-12-01
description In this article I reflect on ways in which the neoliberal university and its administrative counterpart, new public management (NPM), affect academic publishing activity. One characteristic feature of NPM is the urge to use simple numerical indicators of research output as a tool to allocate funding and, in practice if not in theory, as a means of assessing research quality. This ranges from the use of journal impact factors (IF) and ranking of journals to publication points to determine what types of work in publishing is counted as meritorious for funding allocation. I argue that it is a fallacy to attempt to assess quality of scholarship through quantitative measures of publication output. I base my arguments on my experiences of editing a Norwegian geographical journal over a period of 16 years, along with my experiences as a scholar working for many years within the Norwegian university system.
url https://fennia.journal.fi/article/view/66602
work_keys_str_mv AT michaelrichardhandleyjones canresearchqualitybemeasuredquantitativelyonqualityofscholarshipnumericalresearchindicatorsandacademicpublishingexperiencesfromnorway
_version_ 1724537828862328832