Conclusion: what would an evidence-informed impact agenda involve?

Katherine E. Smith, J. Bandola-Gill, N. Meer, E. Stewart, R. Watermeyer
{"title":"Conclusion: what would an evidence-informed impact agenda involve?","authors":"Katherine E. Smith, J. Bandola-Gill, N. Meer, E. Stewart, R. Watermeyer","doi":"10.1332/POLICYPRESS/9781447339854.003.0010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This chapter seeks to apply the critical perspectives of the previous chapters to provide some pragmatic and practical suggestions for redeveloping the UK research impact agenda. To do this, the chapter summarises the key concerns about, and support for, research impact identified in the book and situates these findings in the context of existing literature/debates. It then draws on suggestions from each of the book’s five authors to outline alternative potential approaches to incentivising, monitoring and rewarding research impact, informed by the ideas evident in their respective research and subject areas.","PeriodicalId":378348,"journal":{"name":"The Impact Agenda","volume":"25 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Impact Agenda","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1332/POLICYPRESS/9781447339854.003.0010","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This chapter seeks to apply the critical perspectives of the previous chapters to provide some pragmatic and practical suggestions for redeveloping the UK research impact agenda. To do this, the chapter summarises the key concerns about, and support for, research impact identified in the book and situates these findings in the context of existing literature/debates. It then draws on suggestions from each of the book’s five authors to outline alternative potential approaches to incentivising, monitoring and rewarding research impact, informed by the ideas evident in their respective research and subject areas.
结论:循证影响议程包括什么?
本章试图运用前几章的批判性观点,为重新制定英国研究影响议程提供一些务实和实用的建议。为了做到这一点,本章总结了书中确定的研究影响的关键问题和支持,并将这些发现置于现有文献/辩论的背景下。然后,根据本书五位作者各自的研究和主题领域中显而易见的观点,概述了激励、监督和奖励研究影响的潜在替代方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信