Research impact and visibility: Responsible research evaluation

The Tampere higher education community systematically follows up on and evaluates the progress and impact of open science and research and makes the necessary actions to achieve the goals:

• Open science and research in the Tampere higher education community -policy (pdf)
• Tampere University´s open Science Action Plan (pdf)

The Federation of Finnish Learned Societies has published a recommendation on responsible researcher evaluation. The recommendation has been prepared from the perspective of individual researcher evaluation. The same principles should be followed when evaluating research organizations, research units and research in a broader context:

• Good practice in researcher evaluation. Recommendation for the responsible evaluation of a researcher in Finland.

Publication Forum (in Finnish often referred to as JUFO) evaluates Finnish and foreign academic publication channels. This manual contains the recommendations on the responsible use of the JUFO classification as a research evaluation tool.

• User guide for the Publication Forum classification

As a signatory of the international DORA Declaration (San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment), the University is committed to improving the ways in which the output of scientific research is evaluated in order to make such assessments more open and transparent.

• DORA

The University of Tampere has signed The Agreement on Reforming Research Assessment (2022). The agreement commits to responsible research and researcher assessment.

• The Agreement on Reforming Research Assessment

Are you interested in responsible evaluation? Read more: 

• Metrics toolkit

Source: RRI Tools (09/2021)

• When evaluating research, organisations should use measures that are based on their mission and values. Campbell’s Law tells us that we get what we measure.
• When evaluating, use indicators that are appropriate for the things they seek to measure.
• A combination of quantitative and qualitative approaches usually provide better answers to
  evaluation questions.
• It is wise to invest for evaluations that gives valid answers and which are implemeted responsibly.
• The use of poor metrics can lead to negative publicity and might have a negative impact on staff well-being.

Source: INORMS: Five arguments to persuade HE Leaders to evaluate research responsibly (pdf)