The new configuration of metrics, rules, and guidelines creates a disturbing ambiguity in academia

Much of academia has become increasingly influenced by metrics and a set of metrical practices. However, few have totally understood the massive wave of conflicting rules and guidelines that are necessary in order to stabilise these metrical practices. Peter Dahler-Larsen, using examples from his own experiences in Denmark, explains how these multiple, cross-cutting rules have created a disturbing ambiguity in academia. The bibliometric system and the rules which accompany it have created an environment in which many if not most researchers can be identified as transgressors

Bør arbejdspladsvurderinger offentliggøres? Om cirkulation af evaluativ viden på arbejdsmiljøområdet

Bør arbejdspladsvurderinger (APV) offentliggøres? Efter en konceptuel introduktion til evaluativ information i lyset af begreber som situerethed, relevans, kodifi cering og cirkulation præsenteres i artiklen nogle empiriske resultater fra en ny undersøgelse af APV i den offentlige sektor i Danmark. På det grundlag argumenteres for, at offentliggørelse af APV vil fremme en bedre implementering af den eksisterende lovgivning, gøre det muligt at identifi cere arbejdspladser med særskilt store arbejdsmiljøproblemer, hjælpe med at sprede gode eksempler og styrke den demokratiske kontrol med arbejdsmiljøet

Sprogtest, evalueringer og deres virkninger

Evalueringer og test har alle de forviklinger og kontroverser ved sig,som man kan forvente,..

Making visible the impact of researchers working in languages other than English: developing the PLOTE index

As outlined in the Leiden Manifesto, if impact is understood in terms of citations to international publications, a bias is created against research which is regionally focused and engaged with local society problems. This is particularly critical for researchers working in contexts with languages other than English. Peter Dahler-Larsen has developed the PLOTE index, a new indicator which hopes to capture variations in the ability of researchers to spread their impact beyond the English language area

Hvilken pluralisme? Betragtninger om det kausale design og de nitionen af god samfundsvidenskab

Dette bidrag har ikke et abstract

Evaluation, Language, and Untranslatables

The issue of translatability is pressing in international evaluation, in global transfer of evaluative instruments, in comparative performance management, and in culturally responsive evaluation. Terms that are never fully understood, digested, or accepted may continue to influence issues, problems, and social interactions in and around and after evaluations. Their meanings can be imposed or reinvented. Untranslatable terms are not just lost in translation but may produce overflows that do not go away. The purpose of this article is to increase attention to the issue of translatability in evaluation by means of specific exemplars. We provide a short dictionary of such exemplars delivered by evaluators, consultants, and teachers who work across a variety of contexts. We conclude with a few recommendations: highlight frictions in translatability by deliberately circulating and discussing words of relevance that appear to be foreign; increase the language skills of evaluators; and make research on frictions in translation an articulate part of the agenda for research on evaluation.Peer reviewe